<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_09_2131245</id>
	<title>Mono Outpaces Java In Linux Desktop Development</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1247132520000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>dp619 writes <i>"Mono, a framework based on Microsoft technology, has <a href="http://www.sdtimes.com/link/33597">become  more popular for Linux desktop applications than Java</a>, but recent changes could strengthen Java's hand, SD Times is reporting. The story also touches on the failure of Linux distros to keep pace with Eclipse."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>dp619 writes " Mono , a framework based on Microsoft technology , has become more popular for Linux desktop applications than Java , but recent changes could strengthen Java 's hand , SD Times is reporting .
The story also touches on the failure of Linux distros to keep pace with Eclipse .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>dp619 writes "Mono, a framework based on Microsoft technology, has become  more popular for Linux desktop applications than Java, but recent changes could strengthen Java's hand, SD Times is reporting.
The story also touches on the failure of Linux distros to keep pace with Eclipse.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642945</id>
	<title>Eclipse is stagnating</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247136600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since Eclipse 3.1 is barely distinguishable from Eclipse 3.5 (other than an even greater mess in the preferences and project properties windows), I have to agree with the Debian team.  Why bother upgrading?</p><p>Anyone who currently uses Eclipse: try NetBeans or IntelliJ for a week.  You'll never want to go back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since Eclipse 3.1 is barely distinguishable from Eclipse 3.5 ( other than an even greater mess in the preferences and project properties windows ) , I have to agree with the Debian team .
Why bother upgrading ? Anyone who currently uses Eclipse : try NetBeans or IntelliJ for a week .
You 'll never want to go back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since Eclipse 3.1 is barely distinguishable from Eclipse 3.5 (other than an even greater mess in the preferences and project properties windows), I have to agree with the Debian team.
Why bother upgrading?Anyone who currently uses Eclipse: try NetBeans or IntelliJ for a week.
You'll never want to go back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28654663</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247218620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Java has Eclipse. Look into it. I bet you will like it more than VS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Java has Eclipse .
Look into it .
I bet you will like it more than VS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java has Eclipse.
Look into it.
I bet you will like it more than VS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643977</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft shill</title>
	<author>TeXMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1247141340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>He's probably assuming malice in TFA comparing an old version of Eclipse with the last version of MonoDevelop, and claiming Eclipse 3.1 is lacking features it actually has.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's probably assuming malice in TFA comparing an old version of Eclipse with the last version of MonoDevelop , and claiming Eclipse 3.1 is lacking features it actually has .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's probably assuming malice in TFA comparing an old version of Eclipse with the last version of MonoDevelop, and claiming Eclipse 3.1 is lacking features it actually has.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643073</id>
	<title>Re:Re:Good</title>
	<author>iCantSpell</author>
	<datestamp>1247137200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I second turgid, and I will raise a toast to him.</p><p>compare for fuck sake.<br><a href="http://www.javacamp.org/javavscsharp/getStarted.html" title="javacamp.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.javacamp.org/javavscsharp/getStarted.html</a> [javacamp.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I second turgid , and I will raise a toast to him.compare for fuck sake.http : //www.javacamp.org/javavscsharp/getStarted.html [ javacamp.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I second turgid, and I will raise a toast to him.compare for fuck sake.http://www.javacamp.org/javavscsharp/getStarted.html [javacamp.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642971</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647231</id>
	<title>Re:Thank God for astroturf</title>
	<author>TheTurtlesMoves</author>
	<datestamp>1247220600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know the biggest  resource hog on my machine is firefox....not eclipse.  So does that mean C/C++ is a resource hog?<br> <br>Vista is a  resource hog, MS Office is a resource hog, some games are resource hogs... they are not written in java....
<br> <br>
Perhaps the coding has more to do with performance and resource usage the what the code is written in? Honestly if java is a resource hog you coding wrong or using crap code.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know the biggest resource hog on my machine is firefox....not eclipse .
So does that mean C/C + + is a resource hog ?
Vista is a resource hog , MS Office is a resource hog , some games are resource hogs... they are not written in java... . Perhaps the coding has more to do with performance and resource usage the what the code is written in ?
Honestly if java is a resource hog you coding wrong or using crap code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know the biggest  resource hog on my machine is firefox....not eclipse.
So does that mean C/C++ is a resource hog?
Vista is a  resource hog, MS Office is a resource hog, some games are resource hogs... they are not written in java....
 
Perhaps the coding has more to do with performance and resource usage the what the code is written in?
Honestly if java is a resource hog you coding wrong or using crap code.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644121</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647569</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think so</title>
	<author>Anonymous Countword</author>
	<datestamp>1247226000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Java
public class Hello {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println("Hello");
    }
}

C#
using System;
class Hello {
    public static void Main(string[] args) {
        Console.WriteLine("Hello");
    }
}

I'm not sure how your senses work but both of them look pretty artificial to me.

By the way, I think you mean Linux Desktop Development.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Java public class Hello { public static void main ( String [ ] args ) { System.out.println ( " Hello " ) ; } } C # using System ; class Hello { public static void Main ( string [ ] args ) { Console.WriteLine ( " Hello " ) ; } } I 'm not sure how your senses work but both of them look pretty artificial to me .
By the way , I think you mean Linux Desktop Development .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java
public class Hello {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println("Hello");
    }
}

C#
using System;
class Hello {
    public static void Main(string[] args) {
        Console.WriteLine("Hello");
    }
}

I'm not sure how your senses work but both of them look pretty artificial to me.
By the way, I think you mean Linux Desktop Development.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28658457</id>
	<title>Re:look at the numbers</title>
	<author>True Grit</author>
	<datestamp>1247304300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Removing the Mono runtime results in about a dozen Gnome desktop application being uninstalled.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sounds to me like thats Gnome's problem, not Linux's problem.  FWIW, I run KDE, so I have nothing on my system that needs Mono, but several things that use Java.  That doesn't really prove anything though, as "proof by anecdote" isn't real proof at all.</p><blockquote><div><p>Java really has little significance on the <b>Gnome</b> desktop</p></div></blockquote><p>There, fixed that for ya.</p><blockquote><div><p>and for good reason: Java applications don't look and feel right on Linux.</p></div></blockquote><p>Oh please, Linux doesn't even have a standard desktop environment, GUI toolkit, or even a standard theme, and you have the audacity to use the phrase "look and feel" in the same sentence with "Linux"?</p><p>Troll much?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Removing the Mono runtime results in about a dozen Gnome desktop application being uninstalled.Sounds to me like thats Gnome 's problem , not Linux 's problem .
FWIW , I run KDE , so I have nothing on my system that needs Mono , but several things that use Java .
That does n't really prove anything though , as " proof by anecdote " is n't real proof at all.Java really has little significance on the Gnome desktopThere , fixed that for ya.and for good reason : Java applications do n't look and feel right on Linux.Oh please , Linux does n't even have a standard desktop environment , GUI toolkit , or even a standard theme , and you have the audacity to use the phrase " look and feel " in the same sentence with " Linux " ? Troll much ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Removing the Mono runtime results in about a dozen Gnome desktop application being uninstalled.Sounds to me like thats Gnome's problem, not Linux's problem.
FWIW, I run KDE, so I have nothing on my system that needs Mono, but several things that use Java.
That doesn't really prove anything though, as "proof by anecdote" isn't real proof at all.Java really has little significance on the Gnome desktopThere, fixed that for ya.and for good reason: Java applications don't look and feel right on Linux.Oh please, Linux doesn't even have a standard desktop environment, GUI toolkit, or even a standard theme, and you have the audacity to use the phrase "look and feel" in the same sentence with "Linux"?Troll much?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646249</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643283</id>
	<title>Outpaces?</title>
	<author>popo</author>
	<datestamp>1247138160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Outpaces" is one of those sketchy words often used to describe comparative speeds.   It is almost a sure sign of a release designed to manipulate public opinion.</p><p>e.g.:  If Microsoft is growing at 3\% annually, and my small one-man software company is growing at 20\% annually -- I can put out a press-release saying that I'm "Outpacing Microsoft".  But that doesn't mean I'm creating real competition for Microsoft.</p><p>Disclosure:  I haven't RTFA -- I'm just calling b.s. on semantics...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Outpaces " is one of those sketchy words often used to describe comparative speeds .
It is almost a sure sign of a release designed to manipulate public opinion.e.g .
: If Microsoft is growing at 3 \ % annually , and my small one-man software company is growing at 20 \ % annually -- I can put out a press-release saying that I 'm " Outpacing Microsoft " .
But that does n't mean I 'm creating real competition for Microsoft.Disclosure : I have n't RTFA -- I 'm just calling b.s .
on semantics.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Outpaces" is one of those sketchy words often used to describe comparative speeds.
It is almost a sure sign of a release designed to manipulate public opinion.e.g.
:  If Microsoft is growing at 3\% annually, and my small one-man software company is growing at 20\% annually -- I can put out a press-release saying that I'm "Outpacing Microsoft".
But that doesn't mean I'm creating real competition for Microsoft.Disclosure:  I haven't RTFA -- I'm just calling b.s.
on semantics...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247137560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My biggest reason for C#/.Net instead of Java?<br>Visual Studio</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My biggest reason for C # /.Net instead of Java ? Visual Studio</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My biggest reason for C#/.Net instead of Java?Visual Studio</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645391</id>
	<title>Wait, what?</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1247152020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTA: "<p><div class="quote"><p>Mono is clearly more popular than Java. I've been using desktop Linux as my primary desktop for three to four years, and use just a handful of Java apps day to day," O&#226;(TM)Grady said</p></div><p>I'm sorry... has someone missed the gazillion java applications that are cross-platform?  Is this article really based on the opinion of ONE developer?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>However, there was a near consensus among the experts interviewed by SD Times that Mono has done a better job at attracting developers than Java.

According to O'Grady, Java and Linux are two of the most popular disruptive technologies in open-source development, but they are not intrinsically paired on the desktop: Java can run on any number of platforms, whereas Mono can more effectively target Linux. Mono also runs on Mac OS X and Solaris.

"Regardless of what you think of Microsoft, there are nice technologies here," he said.</p></div><p>Yes, yes it seems that it is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTA : " Mono is clearly more popular than Java .
I 've been using desktop Linux as my primary desktop for three to four years , and use just a handful of Java apps day to day , " O   ( TM ) Grady saidI 'm sorry... has someone missed the gazillion java applications that are cross-platform ?
Is this article really based on the opinion of ONE developer ? However , there was a near consensus among the experts interviewed by SD Times that Mono has done a better job at attracting developers than Java .
According to O'Grady , Java and Linux are two of the most popular disruptive technologies in open-source development , but they are not intrinsically paired on the desktop : Java can run on any number of platforms , whereas Mono can more effectively target Linux .
Mono also runs on Mac OS X and Solaris .
" Regardless of what you think of Microsoft , there are nice technologies here , " he said.Yes , yes it seems that it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTA: "Mono is clearly more popular than Java.
I've been using desktop Linux as my primary desktop for three to four years, and use just a handful of Java apps day to day," Oâ(TM)Grady saidI'm sorry... has someone missed the gazillion java applications that are cross-platform?
Is this article really based on the opinion of ONE developer?However, there was a near consensus among the experts interviewed by SD Times that Mono has done a better job at attracting developers than Java.
According to O'Grady, Java and Linux are two of the most popular disruptive technologies in open-source development, but they are not intrinsically paired on the desktop: Java can run on any number of platforms, whereas Mono can more effectively target Linux.
Mono also runs on Mac OS X and Solaris.
"Regardless of what you think of Microsoft, there are nice technologies here," he said.Yes, yes it seems that it is.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28649027</id>
	<title>Re:Java vs. C# is the wrong comparison</title>
	<author>Late Adopter</author>
	<datestamp>1247237760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>CLR also supports true shared libraries, and the notion of a Global Assembly Cache, to prevent the need for mucking around with CLASSPATHs.  And there's (hopefully soon) the Dynamic Language Runtime, to provide true dynamic typing in the VM.
<br> <br>
I like Java, I really do.  (Well, I don't like Swing, but nor do I like Winforms, so...).  But as it stands, the CLR is the best technology with the best promise.  The only reason I shy away from it is that the Linux implementation of the class libraries never seems to have all the features of Microsoft's (and we'll always be playing catch-up there).</htmltext>
<tokenext>CLR also supports true shared libraries , and the notion of a Global Assembly Cache , to prevent the need for mucking around with CLASSPATHs .
And there 's ( hopefully soon ) the Dynamic Language Runtime , to provide true dynamic typing in the VM .
I like Java , I really do .
( Well , I do n't like Swing , but nor do I like Winforms , so... ) .
But as it stands , the CLR is the best technology with the best promise .
The only reason I shy away from it is that the Linux implementation of the class libraries never seems to have all the features of Microsoft 's ( and we 'll always be playing catch-up there ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CLR also supports true shared libraries, and the notion of a Global Assembly Cache, to prevent the need for mucking around with CLASSPATHs.
And there's (hopefully soon) the Dynamic Language Runtime, to provide true dynamic typing in the VM.
I like Java, I really do.
(Well, I don't like Swing, but nor do I like Winforms, so...).
But as it stands, the CLR is the best technology with the best promise.
The only reason I shy away from it is that the Linux implementation of the class libraries never seems to have all the features of Microsoft's (and we'll always be playing catch-up there).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646427</id>
	<title>Re:What does distros have to do with it?</title>
	<author>rzei</author>
	<datestamp>1247167200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
With Eclipse having it's own update/upgrade functionality I really think that distros <strong>should drop</strong> eclipse packaging.
</p><p>
It's damn misguiding though that distros have some antique version.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With Eclipse having it 's own update/upgrade functionality I really think that distros should drop eclipse packaging .
It 's damn misguiding though that distros have some antique version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
With Eclipse having it's own update/upgrade functionality I really think that distros should drop eclipse packaging.
It's damn misguiding though that distros have some antique version.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644201</id>
	<title>Re:This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>EvanED</author>
	<datestamp>1247142720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Can Visual Studio do "extract to local variable" and "extract to method"?</i></p><p>Maybe a Google search for... I dunno... "Visual Studio extract method" would produce an <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/8781" title="mozilla.org" rel="nofollow">informative result</a> [mozilla.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can Visual Studio do " extract to local variable " and " extract to method " ? Maybe a Google search for... I dunno... " Visual Studio extract method " would produce an informative result [ mozilla.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can Visual Studio do "extract to local variable" and "extract to method"?Maybe a Google search for... I dunno... "Visual Studio extract method" would produce an informative result [mozilla.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643355</id>
	<title>mono in website programming.</title>
	<author>chode8</author>
	<datestamp>1247138460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>mono is used often in the indie radio programming. www,dflshow.com is one example with the whole livestream thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>mono is used often in the indie radio programming .
www,dflshow.com is one example with the whole livestream thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mono is used often in the indie radio programming.
www,dflshow.com is one example with the whole livestream thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645573</id>
	<title>Re:MS Is Making Fools Out Of The Open Source World</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1247153700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesus Christ the paranoia is thick in here today... what happened? You all lost your tin-foil hats on the same day?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesus Christ the paranoia is thick in here today... what happened ?
You all lost your tin-foil hats on the same day ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesus Christ the paranoia is thick in here today... what happened?
You all lost your tin-foil hats on the same day?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642911</id>
	<title>Mono is spreading on desktop Linux machines?</title>
	<author>ChoboMog</author>
	<datestamp>1247136480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But...but...but we never get viruses.   =P</htmltext>
<tokenext>But...but...but we never get viruses .
= P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But...but...but we never get viruses.
=P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</id>
	<title>No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247136960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cross platform is a huge reason why I've been loving Mono.</p><p>I've used java for years because it took common programming tasks and made them not only cross platform, but some what standard.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET/Mono borrowed from that.</p><p>Think of network sockets, file access, threads, and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C++. Even worse they are way different on Windows and Linux and so you end up writing big chunks of code twice...for really no reason. Apache portable runtime hopes to do it for C++ apps...but it's quite frankly a pain.</p><p>Bottom line if you want to write a GUI based type app Mono is better than Java Swing and better than playing around with C++ and GTK+...unless you need something to the scale of Firefox or openOffice. Even then I think Mono could scale.</p><p>The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it. With Mono you get a choice of languages, a common library, and apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cross platform is a huge reason why I 've been loving Mono.I 've used java for years because it took common programming tasks and made them not only cross platform , but some what standard .
.NET/Mono borrowed from that.Think of network sockets , file access , threads , and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C + + .
Even worse they are way different on Windows and Linux and so you end up writing big chunks of code twice...for really no reason .
Apache portable runtime hopes to do it for C + + apps...but it 's quite frankly a pain.Bottom line if you want to write a GUI based type app Mono is better than Java Swing and better than playing around with C + + and GTK + ...unless you need something to the scale of Firefox or openOffice .
Even then I think Mono could scale.The Java VM was a good idea , but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it .
With Mono you get a choice of languages , a common library , and apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cross platform is a huge reason why I've been loving Mono.I've used java for years because it took common programming tasks and made them not only cross platform, but some what standard.
.NET/Mono borrowed from that.Think of network sockets, file access, threads, and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C++.
Even worse they are way different on Windows and Linux and so you end up writing big chunks of code twice...for really no reason.
Apache portable runtime hopes to do it for C++ apps...but it's quite frankly a pain.Bottom line if you want to write a GUI based type app Mono is better than Java Swing and better than playing around with C++ and GTK+...unless you need something to the scale of Firefox or openOffice.
Even then I think Mono could scale.The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.
With Mono you get a choice of languages, a common library, and apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646299</id>
	<title>Is it delusion or shameless lie?</title>
	<author>alukin</author>
	<datestamp>1247165400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or may be it is just joke? How one can compare Eclipse and Netbeans to Mono Develop?</p><p>Novel is pushing hard it's half-working Mono in Gnome but it does not mean that we need it. "mononono" pakage is best proof of it. Is there "javanono" package somewhere? Right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or may be it is just joke ?
How one can compare Eclipse and Netbeans to Mono Develop ? Novel is pushing hard it 's half-working Mono in Gnome but it does not mean that we need it .
" mononono " pakage is best proof of it .
Is there " javanono " package somewhere ?
Right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or may be it is just joke?
How one can compare Eclipse and Netbeans to Mono Develop?Novel is pushing hard it's half-working Mono in Gnome but it does not mean that we need it.
"mononono" pakage is best proof of it.
Is there "javanono" package somewhere?
Right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645705</id>
	<title>In other news...</title>
	<author>bXTr</author>
	<datestamp>1247155200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Hustle is now more popular than the Charleston on the dance floor, the Ford Granada outsells the Chrysler Cordoba, and people prefer the taste of Bubble-Up over Moxie.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Hustle is now more popular than the Charleston on the dance floor , the Ford Granada outsells the Chrysler Cordoba , and people prefer the taste of Bubble-Up over Moxie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Hustle is now more popular than the Charleston on the dance floor, the Ford Granada outsells the Chrysler Cordoba, and people prefer the taste of Bubble-Up over Moxie.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647611</id>
	<title>Re:Eclipse is stagnating</title>
	<author>mcvos</author>
	<datestamp>1247226600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The last time I tried NetBeans, it was a pure Java IDE.</p></div><p>The last time I used it, I used it for Ruby. (I eventually switched to RubyMine, though.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The last time I tried NetBeans , it was a pure Java IDE.The last time I used it , I used it for Ruby .
( I eventually switched to RubyMine , though .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last time I tried NetBeans, it was a pure Java IDE.The last time I used it, I used it for Ruby.
(I eventually switched to RubyMine, though.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331</id>
	<title>I don't think so</title>
	<author>jipn4</author>
	<datestamp>1247138400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mono is becoming popular for Linux development because it does not try to be cross platform.  It feels much more natural than Java programming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mono is becoming popular for Linux development because it does not try to be cross platform .
It feels much more natural than Java programming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mono is becoming popular for Linux development because it does not try to be cross platform.
It feels much more natural than Java programming.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647301</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Desktop: Not freakin' Swing!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247221560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>but on the desktop integration is everything.</p></div><p>I hate integration. It means that a single update of a single package can bring the whole thing down. Honestly if i want to play music I don't give a carrots ass if its using the same font as the bloody word pad. I just want to play the friken music... I don't give a flip if it stores the setting in some kde standard place if it has crap playlist editing.... etc...  <br> <br>
Whats the point of looking all nice and integrated if it doesn't bloody work? Which is why the bulk of the apps i use and find productive are bad examples of desktop integration.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but on the desktop integration is everything.I hate integration .
It means that a single update of a single package can bring the whole thing down .
Honestly if i want to play music I do n't give a carrots ass if its using the same font as the bloody word pad .
I just want to play the friken music... I do n't give a flip if it stores the setting in some kde standard place if it has crap playlist editing.... etc.. . Whats the point of looking all nice and integrated if it does n't bloody work ?
Which is why the bulk of the apps i use and find productive are bad examples of desktop integration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but on the desktop integration is everything.I hate integration.
It means that a single update of a single package can bring the whole thing down.
Honestly if i want to play music I don't give a carrots ass if its using the same font as the bloody word pad.
I just want to play the friken music... I don't give a flip if it stores the setting in some kde standard place if it has crap playlist editing.... etc...   
Whats the point of looking all nice and integrated if it doesn't bloody work?
Which is why the bulk of the apps i use and find productive are bad examples of desktop integration.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644391</id>
	<title>Mono is a good choice</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1247143680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>if you're primarily a Windows developer</i></p><p>That was part of the problem,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net wasn't cross platform capable until Mono came along.  MS ties it's tech to it's own products, or threatens to drop support.  I can easily imagine MS Embracing, Extending, and Extinguishing Mono and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net on Linux.  Meanwhile I use Eclipse for Java, and can use it for other languages as well, on my Mac.  And if and when I finally rebuild my Linux PC I can use Eclipse on it as well.</p><p><i>Mac development has always been a niche job and learning the specifics library methods to make Java apps "work" like native mac applications I can't see much reason in not just writing it in Objective-C.</i></p><p>This has a similar problem, using Mac specific GUIs it's no longer cross platform.  And Objective-C isn't cross platform either.</p><p><i>for a lot of us (like me) our CS programs focused on CS</i></p><p>That's how it should be, CS shouldn't focus on specific tools but on general principles.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if you 're primarily a Windows developerThat was part of the problem , .net was n't cross platform capable until Mono came along .
MS ties it 's tech to it 's own products , or threatens to drop support .
I can easily imagine MS Embracing , Extending , and Extinguishing Mono and .net on Linux .
Meanwhile I use Eclipse for Java , and can use it for other languages as well , on my Mac .
And if and when I finally rebuild my Linux PC I can use Eclipse on it as well.Mac development has always been a niche job and learning the specifics library methods to make Java apps " work " like native mac applications I ca n't see much reason in not just writing it in Objective-C.This has a similar problem , using Mac specific GUIs it 's no longer cross platform .
And Objective-C is n't cross platform either.for a lot of us ( like me ) our CS programs focused on CSThat 's how it should be , CS should n't focus on specific tools but on general principles .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if you're primarily a Windows developerThat was part of the problem, .net wasn't cross platform capable until Mono came along.
MS ties it's tech to it's own products, or threatens to drop support.
I can easily imagine MS Embracing, Extending, and Extinguishing Mono and .net on Linux.
Meanwhile I use Eclipse for Java, and can use it for other languages as well, on my Mac.
And if and when I finally rebuild my Linux PC I can use Eclipse on it as well.Mac development has always been a niche job and learning the specifics library methods to make Java apps "work" like native mac applications I can't see much reason in not just writing it in Objective-C.This has a similar problem, using Mac specific GUIs it's no longer cross platform.
And Objective-C isn't cross platform either.for a lot of us (like me) our CS programs focused on CSThat's how it should be, CS shouldn't focus on specific tools but on general principles.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643769</id>
	<title>Re:This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>street struttin'</author>
	<datestamp>1247140200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Do I get a volume discount if I want five of them ?</p></div><p>Only if they are all the same article.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do I get a volume discount if I want five of them ? Only if they are all the same article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Do I get a volume discount if I want five of them ?Only if they are all the same article.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644121</id>
	<title>Thank God for astroturf</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1247142300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't get me wrong here - I despise Java, primarily because it's a resource hog on all platforms.  Only masochists could ever have really liked Java - especially on older and/or low end machines.  It blows.  But, mono?  Microsoft is blowing it's own horn here.  Java is already on 100\% of *nix desktops, plus or minus a percent.  Mono has made it onto 10\%?  Wow!! Mono growth outstrips Java!!!</p><p>Give me a frigging break.</p><p>There must be some natural turf somewhere, but we won't find it here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't get me wrong here - I despise Java , primarily because it 's a resource hog on all platforms .
Only masochists could ever have really liked Java - especially on older and/or low end machines .
It blows .
But , mono ?
Microsoft is blowing it 's own horn here .
Java is already on 100 \ % of * nix desktops , plus or minus a percent .
Mono has made it onto 10 \ % ?
Wow ! ! Mono growth outstrips Java ! !
! Give me a frigging break.There must be some natural turf somewhere , but we wo n't find it here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't get me wrong here - I despise Java, primarily because it's a resource hog on all platforms.
Only masochists could ever have really liked Java - especially on older and/or low end machines.
It blows.
But, mono?
Microsoft is blowing it's own horn here.
Java is already on 100\% of *nix desktops, plus or minus a percent.
Mono has made it onto 10\%?
Wow!! Mono growth outstrips Java!!
!Give me a frigging break.There must be some natural turf somewhere, but we won't find it here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28662693</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Desktop: Not freakin' Swing!</title>
	<author>dkf</author>
	<datestamp>1247302800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Any Java application written for the Linux desktop that uses Swing over native desktop bindings is foolish. Each has their place, for sure, but on the desktop integration is everything.</p></div><p>You might as well also claim that anyone who has to develop and deploy software across lots of platforms is foolish too. After all, developers have lots of time to reimplement the entire GUI layer for each supported platform.<br>&lt;/sarcasm&gt;</p><p>For a great many developers, desktop integration is not and should not be everything. They've got real applications to support, and not just desktop toys or reinventions of the wheel. (Some are commercial developers, some aren't, but those specialist apps are not going to go away soon; there's just not that big a global market for them that they commoditize.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any Java application written for the Linux desktop that uses Swing over native desktop bindings is foolish .
Each has their place , for sure , but on the desktop integration is everything.You might as well also claim that anyone who has to develop and deploy software across lots of platforms is foolish too .
After all , developers have lots of time to reimplement the entire GUI layer for each supported platform.For a great many developers , desktop integration is not and should not be everything .
They 've got real applications to support , and not just desktop toys or reinventions of the wheel .
( Some are commercial developers , some are n't , but those specialist apps are not going to go away soon ; there 's just not that big a global market for them that they commoditize .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any Java application written for the Linux desktop that uses Swing over native desktop bindings is foolish.
Each has their place, for sure, but on the desktop integration is everything.You might as well also claim that anyone who has to develop and deploy software across lots of platforms is foolish too.
After all, developers have lots of time to reimplement the entire GUI layer for each supported platform.For a great many developers, desktop integration is not and should not be everything.
They've got real applications to support, and not just desktop toys or reinventions of the wheel.
(Some are commercial developers, some aren't, but those specialist apps are not going to go away soon; there's just not that big a global market for them that they commoditize.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643745</id>
	<title>No code completion or debugger?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247140140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>"Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities, Hargett claimed. "I've found in my consulting that people who install Eclipse 3.1 through the [Debian] package manager say, 'This is terrible.' " He said that customers that have installed a version of Eclipse beyond 3.1 like it."</i> </p><p>Just out of curiosity, I just downloaded a copy of Eclipse 1.0.  This build is from November 2001.</p><p><a href="http://archive.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/R-1.0-200111070001/index.php" title="eclipse.org" rel="nofollow">http://archive.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/R-1.0-200111070001/index.php</a> [eclipse.org]</p><p>For the record, it has code completion and integrated debugging.  I do remember back in 2004 thinking IntelliJ IDEA's refactoring support was far better, so I suppose that was roughly the 3.0 timeframe.  I guess I could track the JUnit plugin history and see which version of Eclipse started including this, but I think I've already made my point.  I've got nothing against Mono, but geeze, what a load of BS...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has , including code completion , integrated debugging , refactoring , and unit testing capabilities , Hargett claimed .
" I 've found in my consulting that people who install Eclipse 3.1 through the [ Debian ] package manager say , 'This is terrible .
' " He said that customers that have installed a version of Eclipse beyond 3.1 like it .
" Just out of curiosity , I just downloaded a copy of Eclipse 1.0 .
This build is from November 2001.http : //archive.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/R-1.0-200111070001/index.php [ eclipse.org ] For the record , it has code completion and integrated debugging .
I do remember back in 2004 thinking IntelliJ IDEA 's refactoring support was far better , so I suppose that was roughly the 3.0 timeframe .
I guess I could track the JUnit plugin history and see which version of Eclipse started including this , but I think I 've already made my point .
I 've got nothing against Mono , but geeze , what a load of BS.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities, Hargett claimed.
"I've found in my consulting that people who install Eclipse 3.1 through the [Debian] package manager say, 'This is terrible.
' " He said that customers that have installed a version of Eclipse beyond 3.1 like it.
" Just out of curiosity, I just downloaded a copy of Eclipse 1.0.
This build is from November 2001.http://archive.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/R-1.0-200111070001/index.php [eclipse.org]For the record, it has code completion and integrated debugging.
I do remember back in 2004 thinking IntelliJ IDEA's refactoring support was far better, so I suppose that was roughly the 3.0 timeframe.
I guess I could track the JUnit plugin history and see which version of Eclipse started including this, but I think I've already made my point.
I've got nothing against Mono, but geeze, what a load of BS...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646531</id>
	<title>Re:MS Is Making Fools Out Of The Open Source World</title>
	<author>miguel</author>
	<datestamp>1247168880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I cant be incompetent and at the same time succeed in derailing Linux application development.   Pick one.</p><p>Your rage prevents you from making a cogent argument though;    I did not "derail" any application development, if anything, I created a project that many people seem to enjoy using.</p><p>The fact that you can not tolerate that others do as they please, and that you feel that people need to obey is merely a manifestation of your fascist tendencies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I cant be incompetent and at the same time succeed in derailing Linux application development .
Pick one.Your rage prevents you from making a cogent argument though ; I did not " derail " any application development , if anything , I created a project that many people seem to enjoy using.The fact that you can not tolerate that others do as they please , and that you feel that people need to obey is merely a manifestation of your fascist tendencies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I cant be incompetent and at the same time succeed in derailing Linux application development.
Pick one.Your rage prevents you from making a cogent argument though;    I did not "derail" any application development, if anything, I created a project that many people seem to enjoy using.The fact that you can not tolerate that others do as they please, and that you feel that people need to obey is merely a manifestation of your fascist tendencies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642971</id>
	<title>Re:Good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247136780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot has changed in the last 10 years. Your comment is very telling, and not very helpful. It's so bad, it's not even wrong. I'm sorry that's what you think.
</p><p> <i>With<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, there is loads of stuff built in so I am not doing a lot of low level coding.</i>
</p><p>There are orders of magnitude more stuff "built-in" to Java (the platform), 3rd-party stuff, independent implementations, and it's had a good decade and a half of hardening in real-world situations (top businesses etc.)
</p><p>gcc even has a java (the language) compiler now (OK for about 5 years) that generates native machine code (what everyone used to whinge about) and there are independent implementations of the Java libraries (e.g. GNU Classpath).
</p><p>Mono needs to die a death. Please ignore it and hopefully it will go away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot has changed in the last 10 years .
Your comment is very telling , and not very helpful .
It 's so bad , it 's not even wrong .
I 'm sorry that 's what you think .
With .NET , there is loads of stuff built in so I am not doing a lot of low level coding .
There are orders of magnitude more stuff " built-in " to Java ( the platform ) , 3rd-party stuff , independent implementations , and it 's had a good decade and a half of hardening in real-world situations ( top businesses etc .
) gcc even has a java ( the language ) compiler now ( OK for about 5 years ) that generates native machine code ( what everyone used to whinge about ) and there are independent implementations of the Java libraries ( e.g .
GNU Classpath ) .
Mono needs to die a death .
Please ignore it and hopefully it will go away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot has changed in the last 10 years.
Your comment is very telling, and not very helpful.
It's so bad, it's not even wrong.
I'm sorry that's what you think.
With .NET, there is loads of stuff built in so I am not doing a lot of low level coding.
There are orders of magnitude more stuff "built-in" to Java (the platform), 3rd-party stuff, independent implementations, and it's had a good decade and a half of hardening in real-world situations (top businesses etc.
)
gcc even has a java (the language) compiler now (OK for about 5 years) that generates native machine code (what everyone used to whinge about) and there are independent implementations of the Java libraries (e.g.
GNU Classpath).
Mono needs to die a death.
Please ignore it and hopefully it will go away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648097</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think so</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1247232240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>huh?  They are even taking Microsoft's APIs (like WinForms) and porting that to Mac/Linux/Unix/BSD/Windows.  And promoting other APIs like GTK# as alternatives.  How is that not trying to be cross-platform?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>huh ?
They are even taking Microsoft 's APIs ( like WinForms ) and porting that to Mac/Linux/Unix/BSD/Windows .
And promoting other APIs like GTK # as alternatives .
How is that not trying to be cross-platform ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>huh?
They are even taking Microsoft's APIs (like WinForms) and porting that to Mac/Linux/Unix/BSD/Windows.
And promoting other APIs like GTK# as alternatives.
How is that not trying to be cross-platform?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643597</id>
	<title>Re:Can Mono/.NET do this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247139480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of cource. Plus you have Silverlight/Moonlight for web integration.  Java is a mess in comparison</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of cource .
Plus you have Silverlight/Moonlight for web integration .
Java is a mess in comparison</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of cource.
Plus you have Silverlight/Moonlight for web integration.
Java is a mess in comparison</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642933</id>
	<title>Re:Good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247136600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>both java and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net are garbage. they produce bloated executables.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>both java and .net are garbage .
they produce bloated executables .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>both java and .net are garbage.
they produce bloated executables.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643573</id>
	<title>Re:Eclipse is stagnating</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247139420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Since Eclipse 3.1 is barely distinguishable from Eclipse 3.5 (other than an even greater mess in the preferences and project properties windows), I have to agree with the Debian team.  Why bother upgrading?</p><p>Anyone who currently uses Eclipse: try NetBeans or IntelliJ for a week.  You'll never want to go back.</p></div><p>You obviously aren't actually using Eclipse since you don't know what you're talking about.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since Eclipse 3.1 is barely distinguishable from Eclipse 3.5 ( other than an even greater mess in the preferences and project properties windows ) , I have to agree with the Debian team .
Why bother upgrading ? Anyone who currently uses Eclipse : try NetBeans or IntelliJ for a week .
You 'll never want to go back.You obviously are n't actually using Eclipse since you do n't know what you 're talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since Eclipse 3.1 is barely distinguishable from Eclipse 3.5 (other than an even greater mess in the preferences and project properties windows), I have to agree with the Debian team.
Why bother upgrading?Anyone who currently uses Eclipse: try NetBeans or IntelliJ for a week.
You'll never want to go back.You obviously aren't actually using Eclipse since you don't know what you're talking about.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644949</id>
	<title>Re:Java GUI sucks on Windows</title>
	<author>b4dc0d3r</author>
	<datestamp>1247148180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never seen a Java app on Windows that ran with any decent GUI ever.  All of the objects seem to be widgets drawn custom instead of using native win32 functions and objects.</p><p>File / Open has its own dialog, which looks ALMOST but not quite like Windows version.  It is terrible to operate with a keyboard and is missing features I expect in the dialog.  You're recreating things instead of using the native libraries.  It would be one thing to create new things, but these are just bad copies.</p><p>It's like Java developers and devs who use Java have never seen a GUI, and don't quite know what people expect.  Certainly they aren't Windows users.  As much as they imitate it, they really seem to have no idea what it's supposed to be like.  I get scared when people say things are written in Java.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never seen a Java app on Windows that ran with any decent GUI ever .
All of the objects seem to be widgets drawn custom instead of using native win32 functions and objects.File / Open has its own dialog , which looks ALMOST but not quite like Windows version .
It is terrible to operate with a keyboard and is missing features I expect in the dialog .
You 're recreating things instead of using the native libraries .
It would be one thing to create new things , but these are just bad copies.It 's like Java developers and devs who use Java have never seen a GUI , and do n't quite know what people expect .
Certainly they are n't Windows users .
As much as they imitate it , they really seem to have no idea what it 's supposed to be like .
I get scared when people say things are written in Java .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never seen a Java app on Windows that ran with any decent GUI ever.
All of the objects seem to be widgets drawn custom instead of using native win32 functions and objects.File / Open has its own dialog, which looks ALMOST but not quite like Windows version.
It is terrible to operate with a keyboard and is missing features I expect in the dialog.
You're recreating things instead of using the native libraries.
It would be one thing to create new things, but these are just bad copies.It's like Java developers and devs who use Java have never seen a GUI, and don't quite know what people expect.
Certainly they aren't Windows users.
As much as they imitate it, they really seem to have no idea what it's supposed to be like.
I get scared when people say things are written in Java.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645003</id>
	<title>Hardly convincing</title>
	<author>stuntpope</author>
	<datestamp>1247148600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Mono is clearly more popular than Java. I've been using desktop Linux as my primary desktop for three to four years, and use just a handful of Java apps day to day," O'Grady said.</p></div><p>Clearly he gives no information about the numerous (more than a handful) of Mono apps he's using day to day on Linux. Oh, previously in the article they mention Tomboy, Banshee, and Gnome Do. So what are all the others too numerous to mention?</p><p>On any platform I use (Windows, Linux, OS X), I user <em>fewer</em> than a handful of Java apps each and every day. And you know how many<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net or Mono apps I use (including on Windows)? Fewer than that.</p><p>I suppose going from zero Mono apps in popular use to 3 or 4 does represent a "spike" in Mono development, but I'd hardly say it's evidence of Mono outpacing Java development on Linux.</p><p>As for outdated versions of Eclipse on popular distros, of all the people who would go to the trouble of updating to the latest version regardless of whether it was packaged with the distro, developers would. Pointing out a lack of code completion or integrated debugging in Eclipse is a laugh.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Mono is clearly more popular than Java .
I 've been using desktop Linux as my primary desktop for three to four years , and use just a handful of Java apps day to day , " O'Grady said.Clearly he gives no information about the numerous ( more than a handful ) of Mono apps he 's using day to day on Linux .
Oh , previously in the article they mention Tomboy , Banshee , and Gnome Do .
So what are all the others too numerous to mention ? On any platform I use ( Windows , Linux , OS X ) , I user fewer than a handful of Java apps each and every day .
And you know how many .Net or Mono apps I use ( including on Windows ) ?
Fewer than that.I suppose going from zero Mono apps in popular use to 3 or 4 does represent a " spike " in Mono development , but I 'd hardly say it 's evidence of Mono outpacing Java development on Linux.As for outdated versions of Eclipse on popular distros , of all the people who would go to the trouble of updating to the latest version regardless of whether it was packaged with the distro , developers would .
Pointing out a lack of code completion or integrated debugging in Eclipse is a laugh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Mono is clearly more popular than Java.
I've been using desktop Linux as my primary desktop for three to four years, and use just a handful of Java apps day to day," O'Grady said.Clearly he gives no information about the numerous (more than a handful) of Mono apps he's using day to day on Linux.
Oh, previously in the article they mention Tomboy, Banshee, and Gnome Do.
So what are all the others too numerous to mention?On any platform I use (Windows, Linux, OS X), I user fewer than a handful of Java apps each and every day.
And you know how many .Net or Mono apps I use (including on Windows)?
Fewer than that.I suppose going from zero Mono apps in popular use to 3 or 4 does represent a "spike" in Mono development, but I'd hardly say it's evidence of Mono outpacing Java development on Linux.As for outdated versions of Eclipse on popular distros, of all the people who would go to the trouble of updating to the latest version regardless of whether it was packaged with the distro, developers would.
Pointing out a lack of code completion or integrated debugging in Eclipse is a laugh.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646901</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1247216880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really? Are you sure? The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_CLI\_languages" title="wikipedia.org">Wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_JVM\_languages" title="wikipedia.org">pages</a> [wikipedia.org] give a different impression.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
Are you sure ?
The Wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ] pages [ wikipedia.org ] give a different impression .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
Are you sure?
The Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] pages [wikipedia.org] give a different impression.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643737</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271</id>
	<title>Compatibility != Equality (necessarily)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247138100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the problem is that while Java is cross-platform, it's apps have always been treated like second-class citizens on Windows and Mac platforms. They behaved different, had a very different UI for most of its' life, had a slow big runtime for the dial-up days that every app seemed to have a different version of the VM to run and took forever to load or update.<br> <br>
For that reason, I think a lot of developers have avoided it on Windows and since Windows has such a market share, if you're primarily a Windows developer, Mono is a good choice. Mac development has always been a niche job and learning the specifics library methods to make Java apps "work" like native mac applications I can't see much reason in not just writing it in Objective-C. Apple has always lagged behind Sun in releasing recent VMs and for OS X 10.4, which is still very in use as many Mac users don't upgrade for the sake of upgrading, it still hasn't been given Java 6.<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET (at least on Windows) has always had a form designer which is very quick to learn and rapid develop over Swing/Eclipse which has been code-based (I know, behind the GUI forms is code in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET), but for a lot of us (like me) our CS programs focused on CS, not software development/engineering and we've had almost no exposure to the GUI packages in Java or C, which have a bit of a learning curve even for the educated.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the problem is that while Java is cross-platform , it 's apps have always been treated like second-class citizens on Windows and Mac platforms .
They behaved different , had a very different UI for most of its ' life , had a slow big runtime for the dial-up days that every app seemed to have a different version of the VM to run and took forever to load or update .
For that reason , I think a lot of developers have avoided it on Windows and since Windows has such a market share , if you 're primarily a Windows developer , Mono is a good choice .
Mac development has always been a niche job and learning the specifics library methods to make Java apps " work " like native mac applications I ca n't see much reason in not just writing it in Objective-C. Apple has always lagged behind Sun in releasing recent VMs and for OS X 10.4 , which is still very in use as many Mac users do n't upgrade for the sake of upgrading , it still has n't been given Java 6 .
.NET ( at least on Windows ) has always had a form designer which is very quick to learn and rapid develop over Swing/Eclipse which has been code-based ( I know , behind the GUI forms is code in .NET ) , but for a lot of us ( like me ) our CS programs focused on CS , not software development/engineering and we 've had almost no exposure to the GUI packages in Java or C , which have a bit of a learning curve even for the educated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the problem is that while Java is cross-platform, it's apps have always been treated like second-class citizens on Windows and Mac platforms.
They behaved different, had a very different UI for most of its' life, had a slow big runtime for the dial-up days that every app seemed to have a different version of the VM to run and took forever to load or update.
For that reason, I think a lot of developers have avoided it on Windows and since Windows has such a market share, if you're primarily a Windows developer, Mono is a good choice.
Mac development has always been a niche job and learning the specifics library methods to make Java apps "work" like native mac applications I can't see much reason in not just writing it in Objective-C. Apple has always lagged behind Sun in releasing recent VMs and for OS X 10.4, which is still very in use as many Mac users don't upgrade for the sake of upgrading, it still hasn't been given Java 6.
.NET (at least on Windows) has always had a form designer which is very quick to learn and rapid develop over Swing/Eclipse which has been code-based (I know, behind the GUI forms is code in .NET), but for a lot of us (like me) our CS programs focused on CS, not software development/engineering and we've had almost no exposure to the GUI packages in Java or C, which have a bit of a learning curve even for the educated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646591</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247256000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And because there are a bunch of wannabes who think not being able to go cross platform is a good idea?</p><p>What, exactly, do you gain by not designing for the portability? Nada, at least on desktop application level.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And because there are a bunch of wannabes who think not being able to go cross platform is a good idea ? What , exactly , do you gain by not designing for the portability ?
Nada , at least on desktop application level .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And because there are a bunch of wannabes who think not being able to go cross platform is a good idea?What, exactly, do you gain by not designing for the portability?
Nada, at least on desktop application level.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644529</id>
	<title>Java vs. C# is the wrong comparison</title>
	<author>Kihaji</author>
	<datestamp>1247144580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Java vs C# is the wrong comparison to be making when it comes to what is "better" to develop on. What should be looked at is the JVM vs CLR. This is where the real power of these two languages, and the others that run on them, comes to light. Languages and libraries can be made, but if the underlying VM doesn't support certain features, no syntax will make up for it.

And, in my opinion, the CLR is slightly ahead of Java when it comes to power, mostly because of the support for generics at runtime, whereas the JVM doesn't (Java generics are type erased at compile time).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Java vs C # is the wrong comparison to be making when it comes to what is " better " to develop on .
What should be looked at is the JVM vs CLR .
This is where the real power of these two languages , and the others that run on them , comes to light .
Languages and libraries can be made , but if the underlying VM does n't support certain features , no syntax will make up for it .
And , in my opinion , the CLR is slightly ahead of Java when it comes to power , mostly because of the support for generics at runtime , whereas the JVM does n't ( Java generics are type erased at compile time ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java vs C# is the wrong comparison to be making when it comes to what is "better" to develop on.
What should be looked at is the JVM vs CLR.
This is where the real power of these two languages, and the others that run on them, comes to light.
Languages and libraries can be made, but if the underlying VM doesn't support certain features, no syntax will make up for it.
And, in my opinion, the CLR is slightly ahead of Java when it comes to power, mostly because of the support for generics at runtime, whereas the JVM doesn't (Java generics are type erased at compile time).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644293</id>
	<title>Re:MS Is Making Fools Out Of The Open Source World</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247143140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You must have missed that Roy updated the script when he got back from vacation. You need to get the updated script.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You must have missed that Roy updated the script when he got back from vacation .
You need to get the updated script .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must have missed that Roy updated the script when he got back from vacation.
You need to get the updated script.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645463</id>
	<title>Surprise, surprise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247152680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's this? Slashdot repeating anti-Java bullshit? I'm shocked, SHOCKED!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's this ?
Slashdot repeating anti-Java bullshit ?
I 'm shocked , SHOCKED !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's this?
Slashdot repeating anti-Java bullshit?
I'm shocked, SHOCKED!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643441</id>
	<title>Not for me!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247138760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Java is irrelevant for the desktop at this stage and Mono simply isn't welcome on my machines.  Vala is shaping up nicely and has none of myriad issues afflicting Java or Mono.  There's nothing worse than Mono zealots, despite plenty of people making it clear that they don't want their software these obnoxious mono people keep trying to push it as a dependency.</p><p>No thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Java is irrelevant for the desktop at this stage and Mono simply is n't welcome on my machines .
Vala is shaping up nicely and has none of myriad issues afflicting Java or Mono .
There 's nothing worse than Mono zealots , despite plenty of people making it clear that they do n't want their software these obnoxious mono people keep trying to push it as a dependency.No thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java is irrelevant for the desktop at this stage and Mono simply isn't welcome on my machines.
Vala is shaping up nicely and has none of myriad issues afflicting Java or Mono.
There's nothing worse than Mono zealots, despite plenty of people making it clear that they don't want their software these obnoxious mono people keep trying to push it as a dependency.No thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029</id>
	<title>Microsoft shill</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247137020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RedMonk analyst Stephen O'Grady, the guy being quoted in the article, is a Microsoft shill. And the whole article is filled with FUD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RedMonk analyst Stephen O'Grady , the guy being quoted in the article , is a Microsoft shill .
And the whole article is filled with FUD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RedMonk analyst Stephen O'Grady, the guy being quoted in the article, is a Microsoft shill.
And the whole article is filled with FUD.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648791</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>bonefry</author>
	<datestamp>1247236740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Also because of Qt's design, I barely have to bother with memory management in my GUI apps. So far I'm averaging one delete statement per 1000 lines of code.</p></div><p>Yeah, but you have to miss just one of those deletes, and boom, you've got yourself a memory leak.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Using Qt I can do all the things you mentioned and just about everything else in the C# and Java class libraries.</p></div><p>Not everything is in Qt. And when you'll want to import other libraries in your code, then you've got yourself a shiny new string library to convert back and forth to QString, and a shiny new hashmap that you'll convert back and fort to QDict.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also because of Qt 's design , I barely have to bother with memory management in my GUI apps .
So far I 'm averaging one delete statement per 1000 lines of code.Yeah , but you have to miss just one of those deletes , and boom , you 've got yourself a memory leak.Using Qt I can do all the things you mentioned and just about everything else in the C # and Java class libraries.Not everything is in Qt .
And when you 'll want to import other libraries in your code , then you 've got yourself a shiny new string library to convert back and forth to QString , and a shiny new hashmap that you 'll convert back and fort to QDict .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also because of Qt's design, I barely have to bother with memory management in my GUI apps.
So far I'm averaging one delete statement per 1000 lines of code.Yeah, but you have to miss just one of those deletes, and boom, you've got yourself a memory leak.Using Qt I can do all the things you mentioned and just about everything else in the C# and Java class libraries.Not everything is in Qt.
And when you'll want to import other libraries in your code, then you've got yourself a shiny new string library to convert back and forth to QString, and a shiny new hashmap that you'll convert back and fort to QDict.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643675</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28649121</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Desktop: Not freakin' Swing!</title>
	<author>Late Adopter</author>
	<datestamp>1247238120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Furthermore, just like GTK+ and Qt have cross-platform capability, so do the bindings, and if the appropriate binding library for a given platform is installed on that platform, the Java application, too, will be able to be cross-platform without modification. This is, of course, the job of the distribution and/or installer software</p></div><p>This is not a trivial step.  There will always be advantages to pure Java code, the most obvious being it runs anywhere you have a JVM, and installs and behaves exactly the same way with no platform dependent code.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Furthermore , just like GTK + and Qt have cross-platform capability , so do the bindings , and if the appropriate binding library for a given platform is installed on that platform , the Java application , too , will be able to be cross-platform without modification .
This is , of course , the job of the distribution and/or installer softwareThis is not a trivial step .
There will always be advantages to pure Java code , the most obvious being it runs anywhere you have a JVM , and installs and behaves exactly the same way with no platform dependent code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Furthermore, just like GTK+ and Qt have cross-platform capability, so do the bindings, and if the appropriate binding library for a given platform is installed on that platform, the Java application, too, will be able to be cross-platform without modification.
This is, of course, the job of the distribution and/or installer softwareThis is not a trivial step.
There will always be advantages to pure Java code, the most obvious being it runs anywhere you have a JVM, and installs and behaves exactly the same way with no platform dependent code.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648919</id>
	<title>So what?</title>
	<author>SCHecklerX</author>
	<datestamp>1247237220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>C, Shell, and Perl work well enough.  What is this 'mono' and 'java' you speak of?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>C , Shell , and Perl work well enough .
What is this 'mono ' and 'java ' you speak of ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C, Shell, and Perl work well enough.
What is this 'mono' and 'java' you speak of?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643267</id>
	<title>Can Mono/.NET do this?</title>
	<author>bogaboga</author>
	<datestamp>1247138100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can an informed authority tell me whether Mono or Microsoft's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET can stream data over the internet? Very useful in Forex Trading. <a href="http://www.netdania.com/Products/FinanceChart/FinanceChart.aspx?symbol=DAX.de\%7Cms\_dla" title="netdania.com">This</a> [netdania.com] is what I mean.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can an informed authority tell me whether Mono or Microsoft 's .NET can stream data over the internet ?
Very useful in Forex Trading .
This [ netdania.com ] is what I mean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can an informed authority tell me whether Mono or Microsoft's .NET can stream data over the internet?
Very useful in Forex Trading.
This [netdania.com] is what I mean.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646433</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Desktop: Not freakin' Swing!</title>
	<author>miguel</author>
	<datestamp>1247167260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Additionally, there are some glorious bindings for Qt called Qyoto now.</p><p>The Qyoto bindings power the very pretty Synapse IM client, it is worth taking it out for a spin, because the author has gone the extra mile to make his application good looking and very smooth:</p><p><a href="http://eric.extremeboredom.net/2009/03/15/336" title="extremeboredom.net">http://eric.extremeboredom.net/2009/03/15/336</a> [extremeboredom.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Additionally , there are some glorious bindings for Qt called Qyoto now.The Qyoto bindings power the very pretty Synapse IM client , it is worth taking it out for a spin , because the author has gone the extra mile to make his application good looking and very smooth : http : //eric.extremeboredom.net/2009/03/15/336 [ extremeboredom.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Additionally, there are some glorious bindings for Qt called Qyoto now.The Qyoto bindings power the very pretty Synapse IM client, it is worth taking it out for a spin, because the author has gone the extra mile to make his application good looking and very smooth:http://eric.extremeboredom.net/2009/03/15/336 [extremeboredom.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648559</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247235300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>as someone who would have agreed with you not too long ago I would say that Netbeans may surprise you. I was a long time VS guy who went back to Java and had to use Eclipse. recently I did some projects that required Netbeans and was amazed at how well it was put together. In ways it is better than VS but their are still things i wish the Java IDE's had that VS does well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>as someone who would have agreed with you not too long ago I would say that Netbeans may surprise you .
I was a long time VS guy who went back to Java and had to use Eclipse .
recently I did some projects that required Netbeans and was amazed at how well it was put together .
In ways it is better than VS but their are still things i wish the Java IDE 's had that VS does well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as someone who would have agreed with you not too long ago I would say that Netbeans may surprise you.
I was a long time VS guy who went back to Java and had to use Eclipse.
recently I did some projects that required Netbeans and was amazed at how well it was put together.
In ways it is better than VS but their are still things i wish the Java IDE's had that VS does well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643913</id>
	<title>Re:This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>Headrick</author>
	<datestamp>1247140980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to mention that Eclipse is ancient, 3.5 is the current version.</p><p>Most of the Java developers I know use Eclipse.  I got hooked on IntelliJ years ago and use it for most projects but I use Eclipse for my Eclipse based RCP and my Maven Plugin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to mention that Eclipse is ancient , 3.5 is the current version.Most of the Java developers I know use Eclipse .
I got hooked on IntelliJ years ago and use it for most projects but I use Eclipse for my Eclipse based RCP and my Maven Plugin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to mention that Eclipse is ancient, 3.5 is the current version.Most of the Java developers I know use Eclipse.
I got hooked on IntelliJ years ago and use it for most projects but I use Eclipse for my Eclipse based RCP and my Maven Plugin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642955</id>
	<title>"a certain class of developers"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247136720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Making it difficult to work with Java on Linux gave Mono a "couple years head start," RedMonk's O'Grady said. "That plus the Mono experience, and the fact that there is a <b>certain class of developers</b> that prefers C# over Java leads to a pretty decent desktop story for Mono on Linux."</i></p><p>Yea, and that certain class of developers would be the talented, intelligent developers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Making it difficult to work with Java on Linux gave Mono a " couple years head start , " RedMonk 's O'Grady said .
" That plus the Mono experience , and the fact that there is a certain class of developers that prefers C # over Java leads to a pretty decent desktop story for Mono on Linux .
" Yea , and that certain class of developers would be the talented , intelligent developers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Making it difficult to work with Java on Linux gave Mono a "couple years head start," RedMonk's O'Grady said.
"That plus the Mono experience, and the fact that there is a certain class of developers that prefers C# over Java leads to a pretty decent desktop story for Mono on Linux.
"Yea, and that certain class of developers would be the talented, intelligent developers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646933</id>
	<title>Film at 11.</title>
	<author>Repossessed</author>
	<datestamp>1247217300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Java is as slow as molasses.</p><p>Also, water is wet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Java is as slow as molasses.Also , water is wet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java is as slow as molasses.Also, water is wet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646699</id>
	<title>Re:MS Is Making Fools Out Of The Open Source World</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247257380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hello, Rabid Stallman Fanboy.</p><p>It's good to be so angry. That way, you never have to study new technology (like CLI - hint, that's not Command Line Interface) and you can just play Follow The Leader.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hello , Rabid Stallman Fanboy.It 's good to be so angry .
That way , you never have to study new technology ( like CLI - hint , that 's not Command Line Interface ) and you can just play Follow The Leader .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hello, Rabid Stallman Fanboy.It's good to be so angry.
That way, you never have to study new technology (like CLI - hint, that's not Command Line Interface) and you can just play Follow The Leader.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647631</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>mcvos</author>
	<datestamp>1247226900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.</p></div><p>You're kidding, right? The JVM is one of the most important platforms right now. Lots of languages have been ported to it (JRuby is one of the fastest Ruby implementations at the moment), and it's also had newer languages specially designed for it. Look up Scala if you ever feel it's time to catch up with modern technology again.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Java VM was a good idea , but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.You 're kidding , right ?
The JVM is one of the most important platforms right now .
Lots of languages have been ported to it ( JRuby is one of the fastest Ruby implementations at the moment ) , and it 's also had newer languages specially designed for it .
Look up Scala if you ever feel it 's time to catch up with modern technology again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.You're kidding, right?
The JVM is one of the most important platforms right now.
Lots of languages have been ported to it (JRuby is one of the fastest Ruby implementations at the moment), and it's also had newer languages specially designed for it.
Look up Scala if you ever feel it's time to catch up with modern technology again.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642885</id>
	<title>Good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247136360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I took some Java courses back in school.  I haven't worked with Java in the field, but I must say.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET is a lot more productive compared to the early days of Java (haven't used it recently, so don't know if it's gotten any better).  It seemed like Java constantly made you walk around the block to get next door.  With<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, there is loads of stuff built in so I am not doing a lot of low level coding.  That's all the better.  Just give me a good solid, well written library and I'll use it rather than roll my own.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I took some Java courses back in school .
I have n't worked with Java in the field , but I must say .
.NET is a lot more productive compared to the early days of Java ( have n't used it recently , so do n't know if it 's gotten any better ) .
It seemed like Java constantly made you walk around the block to get next door .
With .NET , there is loads of stuff built in so I am not doing a lot of low level coding .
That 's all the better .
Just give me a good solid , well written library and I 'll use it rather than roll my own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I took some Java courses back in school.
I haven't worked with Java in the field, but I must say.
.NET is a lot more productive compared to the early days of Java (haven't used it recently, so don't know if it's gotten any better).
It seemed like Java constantly made you walk around the block to get next door.
With .NET, there is loads of stuff built in so I am not doing a lot of low level coding.
That's all the better.
Just give me a good solid, well written library and I'll use it rather than roll my own.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644279</id>
	<title>original article is junk, however fact is</title>
	<author>postmortem</author>
	<datestamp>1247143080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that Java on desktop is not engaging to developers, because:<br>1. it takes forever to load,<br>2. it mostly looks different (read inferior) than native UI widgets,<br>3. takes forever to design UI of Java app to be competitive with other made using Gtk, Qt, Mono, etc.,<br>4. severely lacks interfaces with operating system, which limits domain of apps made,<br>5. focus to desktop apps is lacking - widgets are limited, experts and user groups are almost non-existing</p><p>Finally, there are very few well-known Java apps with wide use, one of them is Vuze.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that Java on desktop is not engaging to developers , because : 1. it takes forever to load,2 .
it mostly looks different ( read inferior ) than native UI widgets,3 .
takes forever to design UI of Java app to be competitive with other made using Gtk , Qt , Mono , etc.,4 .
severely lacks interfaces with operating system , which limits domain of apps made,5 .
focus to desktop apps is lacking - widgets are limited , experts and user groups are almost non-existingFinally , there are very few well-known Java apps with wide use , one of them is Vuze .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that Java on desktop is not engaging to developers, because:1. it takes forever to load,2.
it mostly looks different (read inferior) than native UI widgets,3.
takes forever to design UI of Java app to be competitive with other made using Gtk, Qt, Mono, etc.,4.
severely lacks interfaces with operating system, which limits domain of apps made,5.
focus to desktop apps is lacking - widgets are limited, experts and user groups are almost non-existingFinally, there are very few well-known Java apps with wide use, one of them is Vuze.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643611</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft shill</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247139540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If anyone needed any proof that Slashdot's moderation system is a failure, here it is.  One of the few "+5 Informative" posts, and it's a baseless attack using the words "shill" and "FUD".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If anyone needed any proof that Slashdot 's moderation system is a failure , here it is .
One of the few " + 5 Informative " posts , and it 's a baseless attack using the words " shill " and " FUD " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If anyone needed any proof that Slashdot's moderation system is a failure, here it is.
One of the few "+5 Informative" posts, and it's a baseless attack using the words "shill" and "FUD".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643829</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>SpinyNorman</author>
	<datestamp>1247140620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Think of network sockets, file access, threads, and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C++.</i></p><p>Not if you use Qt which has all of those and more in addition to the GUI stuff.</p><p>Qt is a cross-platform library, not just a GUI library.</p><p>Qt-based apps run on Linux, Windows, Mac, Solaris, Symbian S60<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>What are you using for the GUI in Mono? Windows Forms? You could have the full power of Qt via Qyoto...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Think of network sockets , file access , threads , and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C + + .Not if you use Qt which has all of those and more in addition to the GUI stuff.Qt is a cross-platform library , not just a GUI library.Qt-based apps run on Linux , Windows , Mac , Solaris , Symbian S60 ...What are you using for the GUI in Mono ?
Windows Forms ?
You could have the full power of Qt via Qyoto.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think of network sockets, file access, threads, and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C++.Not if you use Qt which has all of those and more in addition to the GUI stuff.Qt is a cross-platform library, not just a GUI library.Qt-based apps run on Linux, Windows, Mac, Solaris, Symbian S60 ...What are you using for the GUI in Mono?
Windows Forms?
You could have the full power of Qt via Qyoto...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643089</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Jugalator</author>
	<datestamp>1247137320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Keeping themselves on the Swing train instead of evolving things like SWT was among Sun's greatest mistakes IMHO.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p><p>It looks horrible on all platforms, because it needs to work on all platforms without using native controls.</p><p>Sure, it's *hard* to make native controls work out well in cross-platform apps, but with enough thought put into it, it can be done pretty well after all. Qt is quite successful, for example. There have been apps I've thought was native using Win32 or GTK, when they were built on Qt. And then I'm a nitpicking guy that often notice when the pixels are off. Running Swing is like watching a puke dry in comparison. For no special reason, because it's shown that native-like controls can be done quite successfully.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Keeping themselves on the Swing train instead of evolving things like SWT was among Sun 's greatest mistakes IMHO .
: ( It looks horrible on all platforms , because it needs to work on all platforms without using native controls.Sure , it 's * hard * to make native controls work out well in cross-platform apps , but with enough thought put into it , it can be done pretty well after all .
Qt is quite successful , for example .
There have been apps I 've thought was native using Win32 or GTK , when they were built on Qt .
And then I 'm a nitpicking guy that often notice when the pixels are off .
Running Swing is like watching a puke dry in comparison .
For no special reason , because it 's shown that native-like controls can be done quite successfully .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Keeping themselves on the Swing train instead of evolving things like SWT was among Sun's greatest mistakes IMHO.
:(It looks horrible on all platforms, because it needs to work on all platforms without using native controls.Sure, it's *hard* to make native controls work out well in cross-platform apps, but with enough thought put into it, it can be done pretty well after all.
Qt is quite successful, for example.
There have been apps I've thought was native using Win32 or GTK, when they were built on Qt.
And then I'm a nitpicking guy that often notice when the pixels are off.
Running Swing is like watching a puke dry in comparison.
For no special reason, because it's shown that native-like controls can be done quite successfully.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647493</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>remmelt</author>
	<datestamp>1247224440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jetbrain IntelliJ IDEA. Once I learned the shortcuts, it's the best IDE I've ever worked with. Integrates nicely with all kinds of Java framework stuff, like Maven, Struts, Spring, Hibernate, etc. Highly recommended.<br>Does javascript, html, all kinds of other stuff. Refactoring is a breeze, most stuff works with shortcuts or intellisense like behaviour, where IntelliJ suggests adding methods, parameters, getters/setters, pulling up of members, stuff like that. Loads of plugins. Integrates very nicely with SVN.<br>Runs on OSX, Linux and Windows. It's a native Java app, but quick, with decent memory management and no crashes (running on OSX here). Personal license is nice too, install anywhere, and you're allowed to have one copy open at a time. This has helped me out when programming on-site at a client's office.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jetbrain IntelliJ IDEA .
Once I learned the shortcuts , it 's the best IDE I 've ever worked with .
Integrates nicely with all kinds of Java framework stuff , like Maven , Struts , Spring , Hibernate , etc .
Highly recommended.Does javascript , html , all kinds of other stuff .
Refactoring is a breeze , most stuff works with shortcuts or intellisense like behaviour , where IntelliJ suggests adding methods , parameters , getters/setters , pulling up of members , stuff like that .
Loads of plugins .
Integrates very nicely with SVN.Runs on OSX , Linux and Windows .
It 's a native Java app , but quick , with decent memory management and no crashes ( running on OSX here ) .
Personal license is nice too , install anywhere , and you 're allowed to have one copy open at a time .
This has helped me out when programming on-site at a client 's office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jetbrain IntelliJ IDEA.
Once I learned the shortcuts, it's the best IDE I've ever worked with.
Integrates nicely with all kinds of Java framework stuff, like Maven, Struts, Spring, Hibernate, etc.
Highly recommended.Does javascript, html, all kinds of other stuff.
Refactoring is a breeze, most stuff works with shortcuts or intellisense like behaviour, where IntelliJ suggests adding methods, parameters, getters/setters, pulling up of members, stuff like that.
Loads of plugins.
Integrates very nicely with SVN.Runs on OSX, Linux and Windows.
It's a native Java app, but quick, with decent memory management and no crashes (running on OSX here).
Personal license is nice too, install anywhere, and you're allowed to have one copy open at a time.
This has helped me out when programming on-site at a client's office.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646249</id>
	<title>look at the numbers</title>
	<author>jipn4</author>
	<datestamp>1247164680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Removing the Java runtime engines on my Ubuntu Linux machine results in only one application being uninstalled: azureus.</p><p>Removing the Mono runtime results in about a dozen Gnome desktop application being uninstalled.</p><p>Java really has little significance on the Linux desktop, and for good reason: Java applications don't look and feel right on Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Removing the Java runtime engines on my Ubuntu Linux machine results in only one application being uninstalled : azureus.Removing the Mono runtime results in about a dozen Gnome desktop application being uninstalled.Java really has little significance on the Linux desktop , and for good reason : Java applications do n't look and feel right on Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Removing the Java runtime engines on my Ubuntu Linux machine results in only one application being uninstalled: azureus.Removing the Mono runtime results in about a dozen Gnome desktop application being uninstalled.Java really has little significance on the Linux desktop, and for good reason: Java applications don't look and feel right on Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645777</id>
	<title>Re:This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247157420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was a review of MonoDevelop in the latest Visual Studio magazine that (to paraphase) basically said MonoDevelop is very far from being even usable, let alone a productive development environment.  This article is clearly FUD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was a review of MonoDevelop in the latest Visual Studio magazine that ( to paraphase ) basically said MonoDevelop is very far from being even usable , let alone a productive development environment .
This article is clearly FUD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was a review of MonoDevelop in the latest Visual Studio magazine that (to paraphase) basically said MonoDevelop is very far from being even usable, let alone a productive development environment.
This article is clearly FUD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28651849</id>
	<title>Re:A few questions</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1247249880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How many application servers have you got where you can run C# servlets?</i></p><p>I'm sorry, what part of "Desktop Development" don't you understand?</p><p><i>This article is bullshit.</i></p><p>While that may be true, that's not the only bullshit I see here...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many application servers have you got where you can run C # servlets ? I 'm sorry , what part of " Desktop Development " do n't you understand ? This article is bullshit.While that may be true , that 's not the only bullshit I see here.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many application servers have you got where you can run C# servlets?I'm sorry, what part of "Desktop Development" don't you understand?This article is bullshit.While that may be true, that's not the only bullshit I see here...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644521</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643887</id>
	<title>Re:Can Mono/.NET do this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247140860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The GAIN Capital forex stuff has a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET implementation of their streaming quote system. I use their Java stuff but I can't imagine it being much different.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The GAIN Capital forex stuff has a .NET implementation of their streaming quote system .
I use their Java stuff but I ca n't imagine it being much different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GAIN Capital forex stuff has a .NET implementation of their streaming quote system.
I use their Java stuff but I can't imagine it being much different.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643309</id>
	<title>Re:"a certain class of developers"</title>
	<author>alexborges</author>
	<datestamp>1247138220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep..</p><p>They "would be" talented, intelligent developers if they had chosen python or whatever the fuck else that has no ties to microsoft patents (or like jjava...).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep..They " would be " talented , intelligent developers if they had chosen python or whatever the fuck else that has no ties to microsoft patents ( or like jjava... ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep..They "would be" talented, intelligent developers if they had chosen python or whatever the fuck else that has no ties to microsoft patents (or like jjava...).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642927</id>
	<title>no mono</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247136540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>we have java apps where i work. and ZERO mono. ha ha ha.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>we have java apps where i work .
and ZERO mono .
ha ha ha .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we have java apps where i work.
and ZERO mono.
ha ha ha.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642963</id>
	<title>I don't think there ever were any</title>
	<author>itomato</author>
	<datestamp>1247136720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is like saying touch-enabled applications have made great gains in iPhone application share.</p><p>Or that there are more MFC apps than Java equivalents for Windows productivity.</p><p>Heh?  Someone bought tickets to the spin train.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is like saying touch-enabled applications have made great gains in iPhone application share.Or that there are more MFC apps than Java equivalents for Windows productivity.Heh ?
Someone bought tickets to the spin train .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is like saying touch-enabled applications have made great gains in iPhone application share.Or that there are more MFC apps than Java equivalents for Windows productivity.Heh?
Someone bought tickets to the spin train.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643831</id>
	<title>Re:This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>MBCook</author>
	<datestamp>1247140620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm guessing he was referring to using Eclipse to develop Mono stuff, but I'm not sure. I've never done Mono/C# development.</p><p>I also agree with the IntelliJ comment. Basically everyone I know tends to use Eclipse. Those that don't use the IDE they were taught in school or that they used before Eclipse was common: NetBeans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm guessing he was referring to using Eclipse to develop Mono stuff , but I 'm not sure .
I 've never done Mono/C # development.I also agree with the IntelliJ comment .
Basically everyone I know tends to use Eclipse .
Those that do n't use the IDE they were taught in school or that they used before Eclipse was common : NetBeans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm guessing he was referring to using Eclipse to develop Mono stuff, but I'm not sure.
I've never done Mono/C# development.I also agree with the IntelliJ comment.
Basically everyone I know tends to use Eclipse.
Those that don't use the IDE they were taught in school or that they used before Eclipse was common: NetBeans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647013</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>mythz</author>
	<datestamp>1247218260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My biggest reason for C#/.Net instead of Java?
Visual Studio</p></div><p> + ReSharper.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My biggest reason for C # /.Net instead of Java ?
Visual Studio + ReSharper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My biggest reason for C#/.Net instead of Java?
Visual Studio + ReSharper.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647873</id>
	<title>More popular?</title>
	<author>Alex Belits</author>
	<datestamp>1247230380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's like saying that hydrochloric acid is more popular as a drink than hydrofluoric acid.</p><p>Both environments are massive messes of overcomplicated languages with even more overcomplicated infrastructure, stuffed with random libraries and lovingly wrapped with overinflated egos of their designers and developers, and wankery of the users who think, it's the second coming of Lisp.</p><p>At this point there are five good choices for developing a new non-game GUI-centric application for Linux (or anything except Windows-only or OSX-only applications):</p><p>1. C++/Qt (KDE and everything useful in it, Opera, QCad, countless commercial applications).<br>2. C/GTK (GNOME and everything useful in it, X-Chat, Pidgin).<br>3. C++/GTK (OpenOffice.org).<br>4. Python/Qt.<br>5. Python/GTK.</p><p>This covers everything anyone would want in a GUI-centric application -- the five reasons I have seen for other combinations are:</p><p>1. As attempt to promote some crappy environment or a "my first application in &lt;crappy environment&gt;" project that got out of hand (Tomboy, Banshee).<br>2. Out of ignorance (all "enterprise applications" where Java was chosen because it's supposed to be "cross-platform").<br>3. A minimal update for some old application that was written before the above five choices became available (the only reason why I still have Motif installed).<br>4. The application IS an environment designed specifically for some set of goals (Emacs, Mozilla).<br>5. As a wrapper over something someone already written.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's like saying that hydrochloric acid is more popular as a drink than hydrofluoric acid.Both environments are massive messes of overcomplicated languages with even more overcomplicated infrastructure , stuffed with random libraries and lovingly wrapped with overinflated egos of their designers and developers , and wankery of the users who think , it 's the second coming of Lisp.At this point there are five good choices for developing a new non-game GUI-centric application for Linux ( or anything except Windows-only or OSX-only applications ) : 1 .
C + + /Qt ( KDE and everything useful in it , Opera , QCad , countless commercial applications ) .2 .
C/GTK ( GNOME and everything useful in it , X-Chat , Pidgin ) .3 .
C + + /GTK ( OpenOffice.org ) .4 .
Python/Qt.5. Python/GTK.This covers everything anyone would want in a GUI-centric application -- the five reasons I have seen for other combinations are : 1 .
As attempt to promote some crappy environment or a " my first application in " project that got out of hand ( Tomboy , Banshee ) .2 .
Out of ignorance ( all " enterprise applications " where Java was chosen because it 's supposed to be " cross-platform " ) .3 .
A minimal update for some old application that was written before the above five choices became available ( the only reason why I still have Motif installed ) .4 .
The application IS an environment designed specifically for some set of goals ( Emacs , Mozilla ) .5 .
As a wrapper over something someone already written .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's like saying that hydrochloric acid is more popular as a drink than hydrofluoric acid.Both environments are massive messes of overcomplicated languages with even more overcomplicated infrastructure, stuffed with random libraries and lovingly wrapped with overinflated egos of their designers and developers, and wankery of the users who think, it's the second coming of Lisp.At this point there are five good choices for developing a new non-game GUI-centric application for Linux (or anything except Windows-only or OSX-only applications):1.
C++/Qt (KDE and everything useful in it, Opera, QCad, countless commercial applications).2.
C/GTK (GNOME and everything useful in it, X-Chat, Pidgin).3.
C++/GTK (OpenOffice.org).4.
Python/Qt.5. Python/GTK.This covers everything anyone would want in a GUI-centric application -- the five reasons I have seen for other combinations are:1.
As attempt to promote some crappy environment or a "my first application in " project that got out of hand (Tomboy, Banshee).2.
Out of ignorance (all "enterprise applications" where Java was chosen because it's supposed to be "cross-platform").3.
A minimal update for some old application that was written before the above five choices became available (the only reason why I still have Motif installed).4.
The application IS an environment designed specifically for some set of goals (Emacs, Mozilla).5.
As a wrapper over something someone already written.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643981</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>swilver</author>
	<datestamp>1247141400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If your idea of Cross Platform is API's designed for Windows with all other platforms being an afterthought...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If your idea of Cross Platform is API 's designed for Windows with all other platforms being an afterthought.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your idea of Cross Platform is API's designed for Windows with all other platforms being an afterthought...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648011</id>
	<title>Re:Eclipse is stagnating</title>
	<author>modmans2ndcoming</author>
	<datestamp>1247231640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IntelliJ seems to be the only Java IDE worth using. To bad you have to pay for it. maybe someone will fork the MonoDevelop project and make a JavaDevelop project.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IntelliJ seems to be the only Java IDE worth using .
To bad you have to pay for it .
maybe someone will fork the MonoDevelop project and make a JavaDevelop project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IntelliJ seems to be the only Java IDE worth using.
To bad you have to pay for it.
maybe someone will fork the MonoDevelop project and make a JavaDevelop project.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648399</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think so</title>
	<author>csartanis</author>
	<datestamp>1247234400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But it <i>is</i> cross platform without even trying.  Every winforms app I've ever written for Windows worked flawlessly on Linux after minor pathname fixes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But it is cross platform without even trying .
Every winforms app I 've ever written for Windows worked flawlessly on Linux after minor pathname fixes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But it is cross platform without even trying.
Every winforms app I've ever written for Windows worked flawlessly on Linux after minor pathname fixes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28652283</id>
	<title>Re:Compatibility != Equality (necessarily)</title>
	<author>VGPowerlord</author>
	<datestamp>1247251500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>.NET (at least on Windows) has always had a form designer which is very quick to learn and rapid develop over Swing/Eclipse which has been code-based (I know, behind the GUI forms is code in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET), but for a lot of us (like me) our CS programs focused on CS, not software development/engineering and we've had almost no exposure to the GUI packages in Java or C, which have a bit of a learning curve even for the educated.</p></div></blockquote><p>NetBeans has a nice GUI designer for Swing.  Unfortunately, most Java developers tend to use Eclipse, which hasn't had *any* SWT GUI designer for 3 versions now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>.NET ( at least on Windows ) has always had a form designer which is very quick to learn and rapid develop over Swing/Eclipse which has been code-based ( I know , behind the GUI forms is code in .NET ) , but for a lot of us ( like me ) our CS programs focused on CS , not software development/engineering and we 've had almost no exposure to the GUI packages in Java or C , which have a bit of a learning curve even for the educated.NetBeans has a nice GUI designer for Swing .
Unfortunately , most Java developers tend to use Eclipse , which has n't had * any * SWT GUI designer for 3 versions now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.NET (at least on Windows) has always had a form designer which is very quick to learn and rapid develop over Swing/Eclipse which has been code-based (I know, behind the GUI forms is code in .NET), but for a lot of us (like me) our CS programs focused on CS, not software development/engineering and we've had almost no exposure to the GUI packages in Java or C, which have a bit of a learning curve even for the educated.NetBeans has a nice GUI designer for Swing.
Unfortunately, most Java developers tend to use Eclipse, which hasn't had *any* SWT GUI designer for 3 versions now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28655165</id>
	<title>Re:MS Is Making Fools Out Of The Open Source World</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1247221800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't fret. Google will probably make their own Desktop environment, and it will clobber anything GNOME or KDE can offer. Google has more usability experts than any other company, including Apple and Microsoft.
<p>
Or so I hope.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't fret .
Google will probably make their own Desktop environment , and it will clobber anything GNOME or KDE can offer .
Google has more usability experts than any other company , including Apple and Microsoft .
Or so I hope .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't fret.
Google will probably make their own Desktop environment, and it will clobber anything GNOME or KDE can offer.
Google has more usability experts than any other company, including Apple and Microsoft.
Or so I hope.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643337</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247138400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it. With Mono you get a choice of languages, a common library, and apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work.</p></div><p>
You mean copying the Smalltalk VM was a good idea.  And there are many dynamic languages that run on the JavaVM now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Java VM was a good idea , but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it .
With Mono you get a choice of languages , a common library , and apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work .
You mean copying the Smalltalk VM was a good idea .
And there are many dynamic languages that run on the JavaVM now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.
With Mono you get a choice of languages, a common library, and apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work.
You mean copying the Smalltalk VM was a good idea.
And there are many dynamic languages that run on the JavaVM now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645947</id>
	<title>Jeez.</title>
	<author>cunamara</author>
	<datestamp>1247160240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who names an application framework after an infectious disease?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who names an application framework after an infectious disease ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who names an application framework after an infectious disease?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647343</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Adam Jorgensen</author>
	<datestamp>1247222160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not just many languages, many GOOD languages<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not just many languages , many GOOD languages : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not just many languages, many GOOD languages :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643337</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643291</id>
	<title>Not the kind of articles to get linked by /.</title>
	<author>moria</author>
	<datestamp>1247138160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFA:<blockquote><div><p>Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Nothing to see here. Move on.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has , including code completion , integrated debugging , refactoring , and unit testing capabilities Nothing to see here .
Move on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities

Nothing to see here.
Move on.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28650073</id>
	<title>Re:Jeez.</title>
	<author>Marcus Green</author>
	<datestamp>1247241840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dunno, neither Java or Mono are the name of infectious disease in my part of the world, where are you from?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dunno , neither Java or Mono are the name of infectious disease in my part of the world , where are you from ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dunno, neither Java or Mono are the name of infectious disease in my part of the world, where are you from?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644521</id>
	<title>A few questions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247144520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many application servers have you got where you can run C# servlets?<br> <br>

How many companies use C# to write Enterprise-level servers?<br> <br>

What does C# give me that Java doesn't?<br> <br>

Unless all of the above have a positive and constructive answer, I don't see any point why I would learn another language for my Open Source projects/contributions when I'm an expert on Java due to my day-time job. This article is bullshit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many application servers have you got where you can run C # servlets ?
How many companies use C # to write Enterprise-level servers ?
What does C # give me that Java does n't ?
Unless all of the above have a positive and constructive answer , I do n't see any point why I would learn another language for my Open Source projects/contributions when I 'm an expert on Java due to my day-time job .
This article is bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many application servers have you got where you can run C# servlets?
How many companies use C# to write Enterprise-level servers?
What does C# give me that Java doesn't?
Unless all of the above have a positive and constructive answer, I don't see any point why I would learn another language for my Open Source projects/contributions when I'm an expert on Java due to my day-time job.
This article is bullshit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646673</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247257080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also he is talking about desktop application. That is not surprising. I have no idea about server side mono; but one application called f-spot which I use to organize my photos works beautifully. I had it running one day and was taking a look at ps when I noticed it was called fspot.exe! The UI is pretty good. I still have to see a good java desktop application. On desktop I would say the comparison should be maybe python vs mono rather than mono vs java IMHO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also he is talking about desktop application .
That is not surprising .
I have no idea about server side mono ; but one application called f-spot which I use to organize my photos works beautifully .
I had it running one day and was taking a look at ps when I noticed it was called fspot.exe !
The UI is pretty good .
I still have to see a good java desktop application .
On desktop I would say the comparison should be maybe python vs mono rather than mono vs java IMHO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also he is talking about desktop application.
That is not surprising.
I have no idea about server side mono; but one application called f-spot which I use to organize my photos works beautifully.
I had it running one day and was taking a look at ps when I noticed it was called fspot.exe!
The UI is pretty good.
I still have to see a good java desktop application.
On desktop I would say the comparison should be maybe python vs mono rather than mono vs java IMHO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643737</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>rdean400</author>
	<datestamp>1247140080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You might want to research before posting next time.  There are more JVM-based languages than there are CLR-based languages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You might want to research before posting next time .
There are more JVM-based languages than there are CLR-based languages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might want to research before posting next time.
There are more JVM-based languages than there are CLR-based languages.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643881</id>
	<title>who cares?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247140860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>linux is for dick smoking faggots. go take another dick up your ass, faggots. i hope you get aids and die.</htmltext>
<tokenext>linux is for dick smoking faggots .
go take another dick up your ass , faggots .
i hope you get aids and die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>linux is for dick smoking faggots.
go take another dick up your ass, faggots.
i hope you get aids and die.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535</id>
	<title>Linux Desktop: Not freakin' Swing!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247144640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A major fault that I've seen in numerous sub-threads is the idea that <em>a Java user interface equals Swing</em>. <b>It most certainly does not.</b> Swing is merely Java's complete pure-Java (i.e. cross-platform) user interface geared towards providing a unified look-and-feel. In this respect, it does a good job. While there's nothing inherently wrong with it from a toolkit perspective, it is absolutely <b>not appropriate</b> for usage on the Linux desktop.</p><p>Programming for the Linux desktop means more than producing a windowed application; one must integrate their application, both in terms of user interface consistency and application interoperabililty, with a major desktop distribution. Specifically, I'm talking about Linux's "big two" desktop environments, <b>KDE + Qt</b> and <b>GNOME + GTK+</b>. While each of these environments have their preferred languages (C++ and C respectively), many other languages have no issues whatsoever being tightly integrated into them via <b>bindings</b>.</p><p>Java is no exception! In Java, I can program a wonderful GNOME/GTK+ application just fine with <a href="http://java-gnome.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net" rel="nofollow">java-gnome</a> [sourceforge.net]. Similarly, I can program a Qt4 application with <a href="http://qt.gitorious.org/qt-jambi" title="gitorious.org" rel="nofollow">Qt Jambi</a> [gitorious.org] (although I can't seem to find an equivalent KDE4 bindings library) in Java. An application written in either will appear and operate on par with any application written in other languages, either natively (via C or C++) or via another bindings library (<a href="http://www.python.org/" title="python.org" rel="nofollow">Python</a> [python.org] has a <a href="http://sourceforge.net/projects/pykde/" title="sourceforge.net" rel="nofollow">ton</a> [sourceforge.net] <a href="http://wiki.python.org/moin/PyQt" title="python.org" rel="nofollow">of</a> [python.org] <a href="http://www.pygtk.org/" title="pygtk.org" rel="nofollow">bindings</a> [pygtk.org]).</p><p>Furthermore, just like GTK+ and Qt have cross-platform capability, so do the bindings, and if the appropriate binding library for a given platform is installed on that platform, the Java application, too, will be able to be cross-platform without modification. This is, of course, the job of the distribution and/or installer software, but operates similar to the <a href="http://deluge-torrent.org/" title="deluge-torrent.org" rel="nofollow">Deluge</a> [deluge-torrent.org] (Python) installer for Windows, installing the client port of the toolkit (GTK+, in this case) and the language bindings (PyGTK) alongside the application.</p><p>That's exactly how the Mono desktop applications work: they write their logic in native C# and use GTK+ bindings (<a href="http://www.mono-project.com/GtkSharp" title="mono-project.com" rel="nofollow">GTK#</a> [mono-project.com], in most cases) to integrate with the Linux desktop environment.</p><p>Any Java application written for the Linux desktop that uses Swing over native desktop bindings is foolish. Each has their place, for sure, but on the desktop integration is everything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A major fault that I 've seen in numerous sub-threads is the idea that a Java user interface equals Swing .
It most certainly does not .
Swing is merely Java 's complete pure-Java ( i.e .
cross-platform ) user interface geared towards providing a unified look-and-feel .
In this respect , it does a good job .
While there 's nothing inherently wrong with it from a toolkit perspective , it is absolutely not appropriate for usage on the Linux desktop.Programming for the Linux desktop means more than producing a windowed application ; one must integrate their application , both in terms of user interface consistency and application interoperabililty , with a major desktop distribution .
Specifically , I 'm talking about Linux 's " big two " desktop environments , KDE + Qt and GNOME + GTK + .
While each of these environments have their preferred languages ( C + + and C respectively ) , many other languages have no issues whatsoever being tightly integrated into them via bindings.Java is no exception !
In Java , I can program a wonderful GNOME/GTK + application just fine with java-gnome [ sourceforge.net ] .
Similarly , I can program a Qt4 application with Qt Jambi [ gitorious.org ] ( although I ca n't seem to find an equivalent KDE4 bindings library ) in Java .
An application written in either will appear and operate on par with any application written in other languages , either natively ( via C or C + + ) or via another bindings library ( Python [ python.org ] has a ton [ sourceforge.net ] of [ python.org ] bindings [ pygtk.org ] ) .Furthermore , just like GTK + and Qt have cross-platform capability , so do the bindings , and if the appropriate binding library for a given platform is installed on that platform , the Java application , too , will be able to be cross-platform without modification .
This is , of course , the job of the distribution and/or installer software , but operates similar to the Deluge [ deluge-torrent.org ] ( Python ) installer for Windows , installing the client port of the toolkit ( GTK + , in this case ) and the language bindings ( PyGTK ) alongside the application.That 's exactly how the Mono desktop applications work : they write their logic in native C # and use GTK + bindings ( GTK # [ mono-project.com ] , in most cases ) to integrate with the Linux desktop environment.Any Java application written for the Linux desktop that uses Swing over native desktop bindings is foolish .
Each has their place , for sure , but on the desktop integration is everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A major fault that I've seen in numerous sub-threads is the idea that a Java user interface equals Swing.
It most certainly does not.
Swing is merely Java's complete pure-Java (i.e.
cross-platform) user interface geared towards providing a unified look-and-feel.
In this respect, it does a good job.
While there's nothing inherently wrong with it from a toolkit perspective, it is absolutely not appropriate for usage on the Linux desktop.Programming for the Linux desktop means more than producing a windowed application; one must integrate their application, both in terms of user interface consistency and application interoperabililty, with a major desktop distribution.
Specifically, I'm talking about Linux's "big two" desktop environments, KDE + Qt and GNOME + GTK+.
While each of these environments have their preferred languages (C++ and C respectively), many other languages have no issues whatsoever being tightly integrated into them via bindings.Java is no exception!
In Java, I can program a wonderful GNOME/GTK+ application just fine with java-gnome [sourceforge.net].
Similarly, I can program a Qt4 application with Qt Jambi [gitorious.org] (although I can't seem to find an equivalent KDE4 bindings library) in Java.
An application written in either will appear and operate on par with any application written in other languages, either natively (via C or C++) or via another bindings library (Python [python.org] has a ton [sourceforge.net] of [python.org] bindings [pygtk.org]).Furthermore, just like GTK+ and Qt have cross-platform capability, so do the bindings, and if the appropriate binding library for a given platform is installed on that platform, the Java application, too, will be able to be cross-platform without modification.
This is, of course, the job of the distribution and/or installer software, but operates similar to the Deluge [deluge-torrent.org] (Python) installer for Windows, installing the client port of the toolkit (GTK+, in this case) and the language bindings (PyGTK) alongside the application.That's exactly how the Mono desktop applications work: they write their logic in native C# and use GTK+ bindings (GTK# [mono-project.com], in most cases) to integrate with the Linux desktop environment.Any Java application written for the Linux desktop that uses Swing over native desktop bindings is foolish.
Each has their place, for sure, but on the desktop integration is everything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28655131</id>
	<title>Re:Jeez.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247221560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No one. From the Mono FAQ:<br>http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:\_General</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <strong>What does the name "Mono" mean?</strong></p><p>Mono is the word for 'monkey' in Spanish. We like monkeys.</p> </div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No one .
From the Mono FAQ : http : //www.mono-project.com/FAQ : \ _General What does the name " Mono " mean ? Mono is the word for 'monkey ' in Spanish .
We like monkeys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one.
From the Mono FAQ:http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:\_General What does the name "Mono" mean?Mono is the word for 'monkey' in Spanish.
We like monkeys. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645423</id>
	<title>Sooooo...</title>
	<author>QuietLagoon</author>
	<datestamp>1247152200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft is still planting articles in the trade press.   Oh, what a surprise.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft is still planting articles in the trade press .
Oh , what a surprise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft is still planting articles in the trade press.
Oh, what a surprise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644633</id>
	<title>As a Mono/.NET Fan - Idiotic Article</title>
	<author>blackpaw</author>
	<datestamp>1247145540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love C#/.NET/Mono, the platform is excellent and the languages great. I also work a *lot* with embedded java and NetBeans - its ok but I do feel Java is inferior to C#.</p><p>However that article was seriously crappy. MonoDevelop is nice and shows potential - but its a toy compared to Eclipse, NetBeans or Visual studio, I would never consider it for enterprise development or a project of any size, I'd rather work with cmake and Kate. When we see C# support integrated into KDevelop4 we might see a decent C# IDE on linux.</p><p>And those bizzare comparisons of project numbers - weird. And is it just me or was the grammar and sentence construction erratic and disjointed.</p><p>I want to see more mono on the desktop and server in Linux, articles like this don't help.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love C # /.NET/Mono , the platform is excellent and the languages great .
I also work a * lot * with embedded java and NetBeans - its ok but I do feel Java is inferior to C # .However that article was seriously crappy .
MonoDevelop is nice and shows potential - but its a toy compared to Eclipse , NetBeans or Visual studio , I would never consider it for enterprise development or a project of any size , I 'd rather work with cmake and Kate .
When we see C # support integrated into KDevelop4 we might see a decent C # IDE on linux.And those bizzare comparisons of project numbers - weird .
And is it just me or was the grammar and sentence construction erratic and disjointed.I want to see more mono on the desktop and server in Linux , articles like this do n't help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love C#/.NET/Mono, the platform is excellent and the languages great.
I also work a *lot* with embedded java and NetBeans - its ok but I do feel Java is inferior to C#.However that article was seriously crappy.
MonoDevelop is nice and shows potential - but its a toy compared to Eclipse, NetBeans or Visual studio, I would never consider it for enterprise development or a project of any size, I'd rather work with cmake and Kate.
When we see C# support integrated into KDevelop4 we might see a decent C# IDE on linux.And those bizzare comparisons of project numbers - weird.
And is it just me or was the grammar and sentence construction erratic and disjointed.I want to see more mono on the desktop and server in Linux, articles like this don't help.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645035</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>koutbo6</author>
	<datestamp>1247148840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think its going to be interesting over the long run to see which platform gains the upper hand.<br>
I would put my money on java since its open. I know mono is too, but it only follows microsoft's lead,</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think its going to be interesting over the long run to see which platform gains the upper hand .
I would put my money on java since its open .
I know mono is too , but it only follows microsoft 's lead,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think its going to be interesting over the long run to see which platform gains the upper hand.
I would put my money on java since its open.
I know mono is too, but it only follows microsoft's lead,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648753</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Late Adopter</author>
	<datestamp>1247236500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ack! No!  If you're writing C++ you don't want to use deletes (as counterintuitive as that sounds).  Exceptions could cause breaks in code blocks before deletes (not to mention outright bugs like forgetting deletes, or having an if() {return;} before a delete), leaving allocated memory hanging around.  The best way to do it is to embrace RAII and encapsulate pointers in objects like auto\_ptr, so that regardless of how your object goes out of scope, it's properly destroyed and memory is reclaimed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ack !
No ! If you 're writing C + + you do n't want to use deletes ( as counterintuitive as that sounds ) .
Exceptions could cause breaks in code blocks before deletes ( not to mention outright bugs like forgetting deletes , or having an if ( ) { return ; } before a delete ) , leaving allocated memory hanging around .
The best way to do it is to embrace RAII and encapsulate pointers in objects like auto \ _ptr , so that regardless of how your object goes out of scope , it 's properly destroyed and memory is reclaimed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ack!
No!  If you're writing C++ you don't want to use deletes (as counterintuitive as that sounds).
Exceptions could cause breaks in code blocks before deletes (not to mention outright bugs like forgetting deletes, or having an if() {return;} before a delete), leaving allocated memory hanging around.
The best way to do it is to embrace RAII and encapsulate pointers in objects like auto\_ptr, so that regardless of how your object goes out of scope, it's properly destroyed and memory is reclaimed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643675</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643139</id>
	<title>Re:Good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247137620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Mono needs to die a death. Please ignore it and hopefully it will go away.</i> </p><p>.NET is an extremely popular platform. Mono is a great back door for Linux to get into the business environment by being able to say that you have Linux servers AND<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET support.  There will be less worries about moving applications. </p><p>And as far as the parent is concerned, I have to agree. Java class hierarchy is a big pain in the ass! Trying to find needed classes and having to include things that aren't needed just to use certain features. It's as bad as MFC in that regard. </p><p>Nope, I think<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET is better in that regard than Java is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mono needs to die a death .
Please ignore it and hopefully it will go away .
.NET is an extremely popular platform .
Mono is a great back door for Linux to get into the business environment by being able to say that you have Linux servers AND .NET support .
There will be less worries about moving applications .
And as far as the parent is concerned , I have to agree .
Java class hierarchy is a big pain in the ass !
Trying to find needed classes and having to include things that are n't needed just to use certain features .
It 's as bad as MFC in that regard .
Nope , I think .NET is better in that regard than Java is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mono needs to die a death.
Please ignore it and hopefully it will go away.
.NET is an extremely popular platform.
Mono is a great back door for Linux to get into the business environment by being able to say that you have Linux servers AND .NET support.
There will be less worries about moving applications.
And as far as the parent is concerned, I have to agree.
Java class hierarchy is a big pain in the ass!
Trying to find needed classes and having to include things that aren't needed just to use certain features.
It's as bad as MFC in that regard.
Nope, I think .NET is better in that regard than Java is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642971</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28652053</id>
	<title>Re:no mono</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247250720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't be bragging about your inability to be infected what is known as the "kissing disease."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't be bragging about your inability to be infected what is known as the " kissing disease .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't be bragging about your inability to be infected what is known as the "kissing disease.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642927</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646881</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1247216700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Strangely, I do Java work as my day job in Eclipse and C# in my spare time using Visual Studio (2005 Express) and MonoDevelop. While I prefer C# as a language overall, I'd much rather have something like Eclipse for C#! There's so much more power to it in terms of refactoring and other features that it puts the minimal functionality that Visual Studio always had to shame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Strangely , I do Java work as my day job in Eclipse and C # in my spare time using Visual Studio ( 2005 Express ) and MonoDevelop .
While I prefer C # as a language overall , I 'd much rather have something like Eclipse for C # !
There 's so much more power to it in terms of refactoring and other features that it puts the minimal functionality that Visual Studio always had to shame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strangely, I do Java work as my day job in Eclipse and C# in my spare time using Visual Studio (2005 Express) and MonoDevelop.
While I prefer C# as a language overall, I'd much rather have something like Eclipse for C#!
There's so much more power to it in terms of refactoring and other features that it puts the minimal functionality that Visual Studio always had to shame.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647881</id>
	<title>Re:This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247230500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He also says:</p><p>"Mono is clearly more popular than Java. I've been using desktop Linux as my primary desktop for three to four years, and use just a handful of Java apps day to day," O&#226;(TM)Grady said."</p><p>How is Mono clearly more popular than Java when the article states that there are only a handful of Mono apps (though perhaps admittedly more popular) and most of which are from Novell and solely because he's only used a handful of Java apps over the years?</p><p>He's not even a decent internet troll.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He also says : " Mono is clearly more popular than Java .
I 've been using desktop Linux as my primary desktop for three to four years , and use just a handful of Java apps day to day , " O   ( TM ) Grady said .
" How is Mono clearly more popular than Java when the article states that there are only a handful of Mono apps ( though perhaps admittedly more popular ) and most of which are from Novell and solely because he 's only used a handful of Java apps over the years ? He 's not even a decent internet troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He also says:"Mono is clearly more popular than Java.
I've been using desktop Linux as my primary desktop for three to four years, and use just a handful of Java apps day to day," Oâ(TM)Grady said.
"How is Mono clearly more popular than Java when the article states that there are only a handful of Mono apps (though perhaps admittedly more popular) and most of which are from Novell and solely because he's only used a handful of Java apps over the years?He's not even a decent internet troll.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643229</id>
	<title>who uses mono anyway?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247137980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who is using Mono besides the Tomboy guys anyway? I know I'm not. Of the two, I've only really used Java.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who is using Mono besides the Tomboy guys anyway ?
I know I 'm not .
Of the two , I 've only really used Java .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who is using Mono besides the Tomboy guys anyway?
I know I'm not.
Of the two, I've only really used Java.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643675</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>pherthyl</author>
	<datestamp>1247139840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; Think of network sockets, file access, threads, and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C++.</p><p>You're just using the wrong C++ libraries.<br>Using Qt I can do all the things you mentioned and just about everything else in the C# and Java class libraries.  Cross platform, without the performance and resource penalty of a virtual machine.  Also the final product will appear more native on more platforms than C# or Java.</p><p>Also because of Qt's design, I barely have to bother with memory management in my GUI apps.   So far I'm averaging one delete statement per 1000 lines of code.  Everything else is cleaned up automatically.  If I thought a bit harder about my design I could probably get rid of most of those deletes as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; Think of network sockets , file access , threads , and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C + + .You 're just using the wrong C + + libraries.Using Qt I can do all the things you mentioned and just about everything else in the C # and Java class libraries .
Cross platform , without the performance and resource penalty of a virtual machine .
Also the final product will appear more native on more platforms than C # or Java.Also because of Qt 's design , I barely have to bother with memory management in my GUI apps .
So far I 'm averaging one delete statement per 1000 lines of code .
Everything else is cleaned up automatically .
If I thought a bit harder about my design I could probably get rid of most of those deletes as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; Think of network sockets, file access, threads, and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C++.You're just using the wrong C++ libraries.Using Qt I can do all the things you mentioned and just about everything else in the C# and Java class libraries.
Cross platform, without the performance and resource penalty of a virtual machine.
Also the final product will appear more native on more platforms than C# or Java.Also because of Qt's design, I barely have to bother with memory management in my GUI apps.
So far I'm averaging one delete statement per 1000 lines of code.
Everything else is cleaned up automatically.
If I thought a bit harder about my design I could probably get rid of most of those deletes as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643129</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247137560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm, I think you should investigate languages that compile to the JVM, it's where all the cool languages are.</p><p>The only think I agree with is that Java screwed up the GUI big time, twice. AWT was too basic, and Swing was too bulky. GUI design tools took years to arrive. JavaFX is rather late to the party, but could be more interesting if work is put into it.</p><p>When it comes to server applications, Java is pretty much your only choice in most large companies. Java and Oracle. Sorted.</p><p>Of course Java has some issues, slow language/platform development, lacking features like closures, and runtime generics. Still, people cope. Beats fighting C again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm , I think you should investigate languages that compile to the JVM , it 's where all the cool languages are.The only think I agree with is that Java screwed up the GUI big time , twice .
AWT was too basic , and Swing was too bulky .
GUI design tools took years to arrive .
JavaFX is rather late to the party , but could be more interesting if work is put into it.When it comes to server applications , Java is pretty much your only choice in most large companies .
Java and Oracle .
Sorted.Of course Java has some issues , slow language/platform development , lacking features like closures , and runtime generics .
Still , people cope .
Beats fighting C again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm, I think you should investigate languages that compile to the JVM, it's where all the cool languages are.The only think I agree with is that Java screwed up the GUI big time, twice.
AWT was too basic, and Swing was too bulky.
GUI design tools took years to arrive.
JavaFX is rather late to the party, but could be more interesting if work is put into it.When it comes to server applications, Java is pretty much your only choice in most large companies.
Java and Oracle.
Sorted.Of course Java has some issues, slow language/platform development, lacking features like closures, and runtime generics.
Still, people cope.
Beats fighting C again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28670959</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>kaffiene</author>
	<datestamp>1247403420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I prefer Netbeans personally... and I've been a VS user for over a decade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer Netbeans personally... and I 've been a VS user for over a decade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer Netbeans personally... and I've been a VS user for over a decade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646331</id>
	<title>Re:Eclipse is stagnating</title>
	<author>PerlDudeXL</author>
	<datestamp>1247165940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The last time I tried NetBeans, it was a pure Java IDE.<br>I run Eclipse at work for C/C++ development.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The last time I tried NetBeans , it was a pure Java IDE.I run Eclipse at work for C/C + + development .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last time I tried NetBeans, it was a pure Java IDE.I run Eclipse at work for C/C++ development.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647585</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>eric-x</author>
	<datestamp>1247226240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>try intelliJ</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>try intelliJ</tokentext>
<sentencetext>try intelliJ</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28650941</id>
	<title>How this gets on Slashdot</title>
	<author>GenomeX</author>
	<datestamp>1247245140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I wanna read highly likely baloney articles I visit <a href="http://digg.com/" title="digg.com" rel="nofollow">http://digg.com/</a> [digg.com] (no offense Kevin, but it happens more often than not nowadays - unlike when digg was still new)<br>I come to Slashdot because I favor and believe in the system article moderation system.<br>So how then does nonsense like this reach the Slashdot front page?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I wan na read highly likely baloney articles I visit http : //digg.com/ [ digg.com ] ( no offense Kevin , but it happens more often than not nowadays - unlike when digg was still new ) I come to Slashdot because I favor and believe in the system article moderation system.So how then does nonsense like this reach the Slashdot front page ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I wanna read highly likely baloney articles I visit http://digg.com/ [digg.com] (no offense Kevin, but it happens more often than not nowadays - unlike when digg was still new)I come to Slashdot because I favor and believe in the system article moderation system.So how then does nonsense like this reach the Slashdot front page?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644567</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247144880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fuck SWT fan tards shit me.</p><p>Do you really think SWT is the magic bullet just because you say so?</p><p>swing - implement code on each supported platform</p><p>swt - implement code on each supported platform</p><p>it's chalk and cheese. the only people who complain about this don't understand the problem swing/swt is trying to solve.</p><p>HINT: It's also possible to write swt code that performs badly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck SWT fan tards shit me.Do you really think SWT is the magic bullet just because you say so ? swing - implement code on each supported platformswt - implement code on each supported platformit 's chalk and cheese .
the only people who complain about this do n't understand the problem swing/swt is trying to solve.HINT : It 's also possible to write swt code that performs badly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck SWT fan tards shit me.Do you really think SWT is the magic bullet just because you say so?swing - implement code on each supported platformswt - implement code on each supported platformit's chalk and cheese.
the only people who complain about this don't understand the problem swing/swt is trying to solve.HINT: It's also possible to write swt code that performs badly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643089</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28653621</id>
	<title>Re:More popular?</title>
	<author>K. S. Kyosuke</author>
	<datestamp>1247256720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What if I prefer Gambit over Python, does that mean that I am ignorant or that I am trying to promote a "crappy environment"? (Why, restartable exceptions, usable debugger and native code performance sure must count as "crappy" for any kind of development.)

No, I really can't agree with your "reasons".</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if I prefer Gambit over Python , does that mean that I am ignorant or that I am trying to promote a " crappy environment " ?
( Why , restartable exceptions , usable debugger and native code performance sure must count as " crappy " for any kind of development .
) No , I really ca n't agree with your " reasons " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if I prefer Gambit over Python, does that mean that I am ignorant or that I am trying to promote a "crappy environment"?
(Why, restartable exceptions, usable debugger and native code performance sure must count as "crappy" for any kind of development.
)

No, I really can't agree with your "reasons".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644411</id>
	<title>Re:Sun shill</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247143800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, he is very well paid by Sun Microsystems. At conferences, you won't find him very far from his Sun keepers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , he is very well paid by Sun Microsystems .
At conferences , you wo n't find him very far from his Sun keepers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, he is very well paid by Sun Microsystems.
At conferences, you won't find him very far from his Sun keepers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642881</id>
	<title>first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247136360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>first~~~</p><p>mono it's what your mother gives you coming out the vagina</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>first ~ ~ ~ mono it 's what your mother gives you coming out the vagina</tokentext>
<sentencetext>first~~~mono it's what your mother gives you coming out the vagina</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28651715</id>
	<title>Mono</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247249220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is really making progress on my Commodore 64.</p><p>Seriously leaving Java in the dust.</p><p>Eclipse sucks on my C-64 too. It can't even load XML files bigger than ~60K yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is really making progress on my Commodore 64.Seriously leaving Java in the dust.Eclipse sucks on my C-64 too .
It ca n't even load XML files bigger than ~ 60K yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is really making progress on my Commodore 64.Seriously leaving Java in the dust.Eclipse sucks on my C-64 too.
It can't even load XML files bigger than ~60K yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644055</id>
	<title>eclipse, uhh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247141940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>because eclipse sucks? who's with me</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>because eclipse sucks ?
who 's with me</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because eclipse sucks?
who's with me</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644237</id>
	<title>Re:Can Mono/.NET do this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247142900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>WCF with a <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms731064.aspx" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">Duplex Contract</a> [microsoft.com] comes to mind. Or just sockets (as somebody above mentioned).
<br> <br>
Fact is: Java and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET can do pretty much the same things and it mostly comes down to prefference. I prefer C# because I still have nightmares from Java 1.3 (not to mention making GUI's in AWT/Swing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... *shudder*). Java 1.5 looked like a big improvement though with some nice stuff I felt was missing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WCF with a Duplex Contract [ microsoft.com ] comes to mind .
Or just sockets ( as somebody above mentioned ) .
Fact is : Java and .NET can do pretty much the same things and it mostly comes down to prefference .
I prefer C # because I still have nightmares from Java 1.3 ( not to mention making GUI 's in AWT/Swing ... * shudder * ) . Java 1.5 looked like a big improvement though with some nice stuff I felt was missing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WCF with a Duplex Contract [microsoft.com] comes to mind.
Or just sockets (as somebody above mentioned).
Fact is: Java and .NET can do pretty much the same things and it mostly comes down to prefference.
I prefer C# because I still have nightmares from Java 1.3 (not to mention making GUI's in AWT/Swing ... *shudder*). Java 1.5 looked like a big improvement though with some nice stuff I felt was missing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529</id>
	<title>MS Is Making Fools Out Of The Open Source World</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247139180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Microsoft 'community' - Microsoft friendly press, clowns like Miguel De Icaza, etc. all are playing hardball to fuck Linux on the desktop up and the Open Source community is just rolling over like pathetic little dogs.</p><p>That incompetent little Microsoft fanboy De Icaza successfully managed to derail the basic window/desktop management into to a pointless and futile war.</p><p>And now with this mono garbage they are derailing Linux application development. And you idiots are falling all over yourselves trying to prove to the world how 'open minded' you are for actually using patent encumbered Microsoft technology.</p><p>What a fucking joke.</p><p>Open source community - you're nothing but a bunch of suckers and losers.</p><p>Letting mono worm its way into Linux application development is like Microsoft making Linux hit itself in its face with its own fist like some contemptuous older brother who wants to see just how far he can humiliate his younger brother.</p><p>The execs up in Redmond must be shaking their heads in disgust at being faced with such a bunch of fucking losers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Microsoft 'community ' - Microsoft friendly press , clowns like Miguel De Icaza , etc .
all are playing hardball to fuck Linux on the desktop up and the Open Source community is just rolling over like pathetic little dogs.That incompetent little Microsoft fanboy De Icaza successfully managed to derail the basic window/desktop management into to a pointless and futile war.And now with this mono garbage they are derailing Linux application development .
And you idiots are falling all over yourselves trying to prove to the world how 'open minded ' you are for actually using patent encumbered Microsoft technology.What a fucking joke.Open source community - you 're nothing but a bunch of suckers and losers.Letting mono worm its way into Linux application development is like Microsoft making Linux hit itself in its face with its own fist like some contemptuous older brother who wants to see just how far he can humiliate his younger brother.The execs up in Redmond must be shaking their heads in disgust at being faced with such a bunch of fucking losers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Microsoft 'community' - Microsoft friendly press, clowns like Miguel De Icaza, etc.
all are playing hardball to fuck Linux on the desktop up and the Open Source community is just rolling over like pathetic little dogs.That incompetent little Microsoft fanboy De Icaza successfully managed to derail the basic window/desktop management into to a pointless and futile war.And now with this mono garbage they are derailing Linux application development.
And you idiots are falling all over yourselves trying to prove to the world how 'open minded' you are for actually using patent encumbered Microsoft technology.What a fucking joke.Open source community - you're nothing but a bunch of suckers and losers.Letting mono worm its way into Linux application development is like Microsoft making Linux hit itself in its face with its own fist like some contemptuous older brother who wants to see just how far he can humiliate his younger brother.The execs up in Redmond must be shaking their heads in disgust at being faced with such a bunch of fucking losers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643815</id>
	<title>Miguel de Icaza - How much more damage can he do?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247140500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You would think that after creating the Linux desktop Gnome versus KDE war and turning 'Year of Desktop Linux' into a joke and now something not even funny anymore, that Linux developers and distro managers would have gotten a clue.</p><p>How many more times is Lucy(Miguel de Icaza) going to hold that football out there for you Charlie Brown(Linux community) before you catch on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You would think that after creating the Linux desktop Gnome versus KDE war and turning 'Year of Desktop Linux ' into a joke and now something not even funny anymore , that Linux developers and distro managers would have gotten a clue.How many more times is Lucy ( Miguel de Icaza ) going to hold that football out there for you Charlie Brown ( Linux community ) before you catch on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You would think that after creating the Linux desktop Gnome versus KDE war and turning 'Year of Desktop Linux' into a joke and now something not even funny anymore, that Linux developers and distro managers would have gotten a clue.How many more times is Lucy(Miguel de Icaza) going to hold that football out there for you Charlie Brown(Linux community) before you catch on?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647593</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>LizardKing</author>
	<datestamp>1247226360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.</i> </p><p>What, languages like Groovy, Scala and Python? Sun may not have ported all the languages that run on the JVM, but there are plenty of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Java VM was a good idea , but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it .
What , languages like Groovy , Scala and Python ?
Sun may not have ported all the languages that run on the JVM , but there are plenty of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.
What, languages like Groovy, Scala and Python?
Sun may not have ported all the languages that run on the JVM, but there are plenty of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28650995</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>Slime-dogg</author>
	<datestamp>1247245320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FWIW, the CLR only has to process<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET bytecode once before it's converted to native code.  The argument about VMs killing performance is pretty bunk.</htmltext>
<tokenext>FWIW , the CLR only has to process .NET bytecode once before it 's converted to native code .
The argument about VMs killing performance is pretty bunk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FWIW, the CLR only has to process .NET bytecode once before it's converted to native code.
The argument about VMs killing performance is pretty bunk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643675</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643505</id>
	<title>Re:Compatibility != Equality (necessarily)</title>
	<author>jipn4</author>
	<datestamp>1247139060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I think the problem is that while Java is cross-platform, it's apps have always been treated like second-class citizens on Windows and Mac platforms.</i></p><p>It's even worse on Linux.  Java's cross-platform features are a failure on all platforms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the problem is that while Java is cross-platform , it 's apps have always been treated like second-class citizens on Windows and Mac platforms.It 's even worse on Linux .
Java 's cross-platform features are a failure on all platforms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the problem is that while Java is cross-platform, it's apps have always been treated like second-class citizens on Windows and Mac platforms.It's even worse on Linux.
Java's cross-platform features are a failure on all platforms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643897</id>
	<title>Re:This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>mctk</author>
	<datestamp>1247140920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, no, no.  You misunderstand.  You know all of those half-finished hobby projects you have laying around?  MonoDevelop actually gets them done!  It's incredible!  My productivity is through the roof!</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , no , no .
You misunderstand .
You know all of those half-finished hobby projects you have laying around ?
MonoDevelop actually gets them done !
It 's incredible !
My productivity is through the roof !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, no, no.
You misunderstand.
You know all of those half-finished hobby projects you have laying around?
MonoDevelop actually gets them done!
It's incredible!
My productivity is through the roof!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645253</id>
	<title>Re:This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>Shados</author>
	<datestamp>1247150820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah it can. Plus there's a fair amount of plugins, some free, some commercials, that will actually outdo Eclipse's abilities (though I wouldn't be surprised if Eclipse had plugins to push it even further...and there -is- IntelliJ.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah it can .
Plus there 's a fair amount of plugins , some free , some commercials , that will actually outdo Eclipse 's abilities ( though I would n't be surprised if Eclipse had plugins to push it even further...and there -is- IntelliJ .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah it can.
Plus there's a fair amount of plugins, some free, some commercials, that will actually outdo Eclipse's abilities (though I wouldn't be surprised if Eclipse had plugins to push it even further...and there -is- IntelliJ.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645763</id>
	<title>I came here to ask that.</title>
	<author>pavon</author>
	<datestamp>1247157360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anyone know QtJambi is doing? I heard that Nokia has stopped maintaining it since purchasing trolltech. Is that a big deal, or was it largely community supported to begin with?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone know QtJambi is doing ?
I heard that Nokia has stopped maintaining it since purchasing trolltech .
Is that a big deal , or was it largely community supported to begin with ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone know QtJambi is doing?
I heard that Nokia has stopped maintaining it since purchasing trolltech.
Is that a big deal, or was it largely community supported to begin with?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28654979</id>
	<title>Re:A few questions</title>
	<author>Slime-dogg</author>
	<datestamp>1247220600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How many application servers have you got where you can run C# servlets?</p>
 </div><p>ASP.NET runs on mod\_mono as well as IIS.  Going by definitions, there is no practical difference between the two.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>How many companies use C# to write Enterprise-level servers?</p>
 </div><p>Many.  This is a bit of a ridiculous question.  Live.com / bing runs on an ASP.NET architecture.  Godaddy.com runs on ASP.NET.  Plenty of companies run both Java and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET solutions at the enterprise level, mine is one of them.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>What does C# give me that Java doesn't?</p>
 </div><p>It's just another language and platform to choose from.  In that, it offers choice.  Granted, there isn't anything in Java that you can't do with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, but the same goes the other way around.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET <i>does</i> offer many newer things, like LINQ and Silverlight...  things that haven't become available in Java.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many application servers have you got where you can run C # servlets ?
ASP.NET runs on mod \ _mono as well as IIS .
Going by definitions , there is no practical difference between the two.How many companies use C # to write Enterprise-level servers ?
Many. This is a bit of a ridiculous question .
Live.com / bing runs on an ASP.NET architecture .
Godaddy.com runs on ASP.NET .
Plenty of companies run both Java and .NET solutions at the enterprise level , mine is one of them.What does C # give me that Java does n't ?
It 's just another language and platform to choose from .
In that , it offers choice .
Granted , there is n't anything in Java that you ca n't do with .NET , but the same goes the other way around .
.NET does offer many newer things , like LINQ and Silverlight... things that have n't become available in Java .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many application servers have you got where you can run C# servlets?
ASP.NET runs on mod\_mono as well as IIS.
Going by definitions, there is no practical difference between the two.How many companies use C# to write Enterprise-level servers?
Many.  This is a bit of a ridiculous question.
Live.com / bing runs on an ASP.NET architecture.
Godaddy.com runs on ASP.NET.
Plenty of companies run both Java and .NET solutions at the enterprise level, mine is one of them.What does C# give me that Java doesn't?
It's just another language and platform to choose from.
In that, it offers choice.
Granted, there isn't anything in Java that you can't do with .NET, but the same goes the other way around.
.NET does offer many newer things, like LINQ and Silverlight...  things that haven't become available in Java.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644521</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643873</id>
	<title>What does distros have to do with it?</title>
	<author>H0p313ss</author>
	<datestamp>1247140800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The story also touches on the failure of Linux distros to keep pace with Eclipse.</p></div><p>What does that even mean? Does anyone ever get their eclipse from the distro?</p><p>
Eclipse installation is an unzip... I mean WTF does that mean?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The story also touches on the failure of Linux distros to keep pace with Eclipse.What does that even mean ?
Does anyone ever get their eclipse from the distro ?
Eclipse installation is an unzip... I mean WTF does that mean ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The story also touches on the failure of Linux distros to keep pace with Eclipse.What does that even mean?
Does anyone ever get their eclipse from the distro?
Eclipse installation is an unzip... I mean WTF does that mean?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644263</id>
	<title>Minor correction</title>
	<author>KwKSilver</author>
	<datestamp>1247143020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Write any app you want with any language you choose.  Run it on anything you wish....  But if it is mono-based or has any mono-dependency <i>whatsoever</i>, it's not going to run on any hardware that I own.  I avoid mono-apps and won't install any distro in which mono is a part of the default install.  I'll believe mono is safe when I see Steve Ballmer, Richard Stallman, Steve Jobs, and Theo de Raadt singing "Koombaya" together on the same stage. <br> <br>

kws@frozenhell~$ man Ballmer+Stallman+Jobs+de\_Raadt<br> <br>

kws@frozenhell~$ segfault<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... this system is going down permanently<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...now<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work .
Write any app you want with any language you choose .
Run it on anything you wish.... But if it is mono-based or has any mono-dependency whatsoever , it 's not going to run on any hardware that I own .
I avoid mono-apps and wo n't install any distro in which mono is a part of the default install .
I 'll believe mono is safe when I see Steve Ballmer , Richard Stallman , Steve Jobs , and Theo de Raadt singing " Koombaya " together on the same stage .
kws @ frozenhell ~ $ man Ballmer + Stallman + Jobs + de \ _Raadt kws @ frozenhell ~ $ segfault ... this system is going down permanently ...now ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work.
Write any app you want with any language you choose.
Run it on anything you wish....  But if it is mono-based or has any mono-dependency whatsoever, it's not going to run on any hardware that I own.
I avoid mono-apps and won't install any distro in which mono is a part of the default install.
I'll believe mono is safe when I see Steve Ballmer, Richard Stallman, Steve Jobs, and Theo de Raadt singing "Koombaya" together on the same stage.
kws@frozenhell~$ man Ballmer+Stallman+Jobs+de\_Raadt 

kws@frozenhell~$ segfault ... this system is going down permanently ...now  ;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217</id>
	<title>This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247137920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I quota from TFA: "Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities"</p><p>Excuse me !? That stuff was even in Eclipse 2.0. Claiming a Java IDE without code completion exists is just stupid.</p><p>Another quota from TFA "Most Java developers on Linux use JetBrains IntelliJ, he claimed. IntelliJ is a commercial product that is not open source."</p><p>Who says most developers use IntelliJ, I personally know NONE. Everybody I know is on Eclipse or Netbeans.</p><p>I'm not even going to bother with the rest of the article. This article is written by one bunch of ill informed people.</p><p>How much money do I need to pay to get an article on the frontpage ? Do I get a volume discount if I want five of them ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I quota from TFA : " Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has , including code completion , integrated debugging , refactoring , and unit testing capabilities " Excuse me ! ?
That stuff was even in Eclipse 2.0 .
Claiming a Java IDE without code completion exists is just stupid.Another quota from TFA " Most Java developers on Linux use JetBrains IntelliJ , he claimed .
IntelliJ is a commercial product that is not open source .
" Who says most developers use IntelliJ , I personally know NONE .
Everybody I know is on Eclipse or Netbeans.I 'm not even going to bother with the rest of the article .
This article is written by one bunch of ill informed people.How much money do I need to pay to get an article on the frontpage ?
Do I get a volume discount if I want five of them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I quota from TFA: "Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities"Excuse me !?
That stuff was even in Eclipse 2.0.
Claiming a Java IDE without code completion exists is just stupid.Another quota from TFA "Most Java developers on Linux use JetBrains IntelliJ, he claimed.
IntelliJ is a commercial product that is not open source.
"Who says most developers use IntelliJ, I personally know NONE.
Everybody I know is on Eclipse or Netbeans.I'm not even going to bother with the rest of the article.
This article is written by one bunch of ill informed people.How much money do I need to pay to get an article on the frontpage ?
Do I get a volume discount if I want five of them ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643299</id>
	<title>Re:No mention of X-platform</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1247138220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Well, except that in reality there are lots of implementations of non-Java languages for the JVM, several of which (Jython and JRuby, among others) have Sun resources behind them, and some of which are even Sun created (Fortress, JavaFX Script.) There were non-Java languages for the JVM before<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET existed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Java VM was a good idea , but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.Well , except that in reality there are lots of implementations of non-Java languages for the JVM , several of which ( Jython and JRuby , among others ) have Sun resources behind them , and some of which are even Sun created ( Fortress , JavaFX Script .
) There were non-Java languages for the JVM before .NET existed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.Well, except that in reality there are lots of implementations of non-Java languages for the JVM, several of which (Jython and JRuby, among others) have Sun resources behind them, and some of which are even Sun created (Fortress, JavaFX Script.
) There were non-Java languages for the JVM before .NET existed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647935</id>
	<title>Re:Compatibility != Equality (necessarily)</title>
	<author>dna\_(c)(tm)(r)</author>
	<datestamp>1247231040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> it still hasn't been given Java 6.</p></div><p>Java 5 is the default on 10.5, but Java 6 is available. instead of <tt>java -version</tt> try typing <tt>ls<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/</tt> </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it still has n't been given Java 6.Java 5 is the default on 10.5 , but Java 6 is available .
instead of java -version try typing ls /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/</tokentext>
<sentencetext> it still hasn't been given Java 6.Java 5 is the default on 10.5, but Java 6 is available.
instead of java -version try typing ls /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/ 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644775</id>
	<title>Re:Not for me!</title>
	<author>Jahava</author>
	<datestamp>1247146620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Java is irrelevant for the desktop at this stage and Mono simply isn't welcome on my machines.</p></div><p>If your distribution does a good packaging job, and the licensing is kosher, I'd be interested in hearing a compelling reason why you care what language any given application is written in. My understanding is both are true for major Linux distributions.</p><p>Really this kind of end-user snobbery is pointless. Desktop applications should be evaluated on their design, functionality, effectiveness, ease of use, and desktop integration<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... not the language they are written in.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Java is irrelevant for the desktop at this stage and Mono simply is n't welcome on my machines.If your distribution does a good packaging job , and the licensing is kosher , I 'd be interested in hearing a compelling reason why you care what language any given application is written in .
My understanding is both are true for major Linux distributions.Really this kind of end-user snobbery is pointless .
Desktop applications should be evaluated on their design , functionality , effectiveness , ease of use , and desktop integration ... not the language they are written in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java is irrelevant for the desktop at this stage and Mono simply isn't welcome on my machines.If your distribution does a good packaging job, and the licensing is kosher, I'd be interested in hearing a compelling reason why you care what language any given application is written in.
My understanding is both are true for major Linux distributions.Really this kind of end-user snobbery is pointless.
Desktop applications should be evaluated on their design, functionality, effectiveness, ease of use, and desktop integration ... not the language they are written in.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644479</id>
	<title>Re:This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247144280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Five different ones, or the same one five times?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Five different ones , or the same one five times ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Five different ones, or the same one five times?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643757</id>
	<title>Re:This is beyond garbage</title>
	<author>ElMiguel</author>
	<datestamp>1247140140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I quota from TFA: "Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities"

Excuse me !? That stuff was even in Eclipse 2.0. Claiming a Java IDE without code completion exists is just stupid.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
In fact, Eclipse's code completion, integrated debugging and especially refactoring capabilities are <b>stellar</b>.  Can Visual Studio do "extract to local variable" and "extract to method"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I quota from TFA : " Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has , including code completion , integrated debugging , refactoring , and unit testing capabilities " Excuse me ! ?
That stuff was even in Eclipse 2.0 .
Claiming a Java IDE without code completion exists is just stupid .
In fact , Eclipse 's code completion , integrated debugging and especially refactoring capabilities are stellar .
Can Visual Studio do " extract to local variable " and " extract to method " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I quota from TFA: "Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities"

Excuse me !?
That stuff was even in Eclipse 2.0.
Claiming a Java IDE without code completion exists is just stupid.
In fact, Eclipse's code completion, integrated debugging and especially refactoring capabilities are stellar.
Can Visual Studio do "extract to local variable" and "extract to method"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647475</id>
	<title>What does this mean anyway?</title>
	<author>WWWWolf</author>
	<datestamp>1247224200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*sigh*</p><p>You can either develop <b>Linux desktop applications</b> on C#... or just develop <b>desktop applications</b> on Java that, coincidentally, work in Linux just fine. The reason why no one makes "Linux desktop applications" in Java is that it's much easier to just screw the platform dependence and go cross-platform. What you lack in platform integration you make up with less headaches when you <em>do</em> choose to deploy the applications across different platforms...</p><p>Last I checked, I think Gtk+ and GNOME bindings exist for Java too. But with Sun improving the Gtk+/GNOME native look and feel support in JRE itself, and more and more cross-platform desktop application building and desktop integration stuff coming in the future (JSR-296 Swing application framework stuff looks pretty cool, for starters), who would want to tie the app to Gtk+ and GNOME specifically when you can, right now, build apps that can already pretty much pass for GNOME apps?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* sigh * You can either develop Linux desktop applications on C # ... or just develop desktop applications on Java that , coincidentally , work in Linux just fine .
The reason why no one makes " Linux desktop applications " in Java is that it 's much easier to just screw the platform dependence and go cross-platform .
What you lack in platform integration you make up with less headaches when you do choose to deploy the applications across different platforms...Last I checked , I think Gtk + and GNOME bindings exist for Java too .
But with Sun improving the Gtk + /GNOME native look and feel support in JRE itself , and more and more cross-platform desktop application building and desktop integration stuff coming in the future ( JSR-296 Swing application framework stuff looks pretty cool , for starters ) , who would want to tie the app to Gtk + and GNOME specifically when you can , right now , build apps that can already pretty much pass for GNOME apps ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*sigh*You can either develop Linux desktop applications on C#... or just develop desktop applications on Java that, coincidentally, work in Linux just fine.
The reason why no one makes "Linux desktop applications" in Java is that it's much easier to just screw the platform dependence and go cross-platform.
What you lack in platform integration you make up with less headaches when you do choose to deploy the applications across different platforms...Last I checked, I think Gtk+ and GNOME bindings exist for Java too.
But with Sun improving the Gtk+/GNOME native look and feel support in JRE itself, and more and more cross-platform desktop application building and desktop integration stuff coming in the future (JSR-296 Swing application framework stuff looks pretty cool, for starters), who would want to tie the app to Gtk+ and GNOME specifically when you can, right now, build apps that can already pretty much pass for GNOME apps?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28667349</id>
	<title>serriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247414400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't touch either of these platforms with a stick, unless absolutely necessary, as a user or as a developer. The trivial extra work required to avoid them is always worth it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't touch either of these platforms with a stick , unless absolutely necessary , as a user or as a developer .
The trivial extra work required to avoid them is always worth it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't touch either of these platforms with a stick, unless absolutely necessary, as a user or as a developer.
The trivial extra work required to avoid them is always worth it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647729</id>
	<title>Terriable article...to bad I agree with something</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247228580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article is a really sad swipe at eclipse.... Too bad that's really not even important. I love using eclipse to write C# code. Visual studio is also good but very costly. It and eclipse are very close in features stability etc. They are both decades old though, so it's really very premature to even compare monodevelop to either.</p><p>That being said a Mono/.NET's approach using a CLI is simply better than java. Period. It's not arguable to say "Java is better than the system that can use any language". with Mono you can code in Java, VB, C#, hell even cobal and get nice nativity compiled libraries out. it's just a better system. The argument can be over eclips vs monodevelop but CLI vs java is just not even a discussion worth having. I know there is the capability for java vm to use other languages but, well, it dosen't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article is a really sad swipe at eclipse.... Too bad that 's really not even important .
I love using eclipse to write C # code .
Visual studio is also good but very costly .
It and eclipse are very close in features stability etc .
They are both decades old though , so it 's really very premature to even compare monodevelop to either.That being said a Mono/.NET 's approach using a CLI is simply better than java .
Period. It 's not arguable to say " Java is better than the system that can use any language " .
with Mono you can code in Java , VB , C # , hell even cobal and get nice nativity compiled libraries out .
it 's just a better system .
The argument can be over eclips vs monodevelop but CLI vs java is just not even a discussion worth having .
I know there is the capability for java vm to use other languages but , well , it dose n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article is a really sad swipe at eclipse.... Too bad that's really not even important.
I love using eclipse to write C# code.
Visual studio is also good but very costly.
It and eclipse are very close in features stability etc.
They are both decades old though, so it's really very premature to even compare monodevelop to either.That being said a Mono/.NET's approach using a CLI is simply better than java.
Period. It's not arguable to say "Java is better than the system that can use any language".
with Mono you can code in Java, VB, C#, hell even cobal and get nice nativity compiled libraries out.
it's just a better system.
The argument can be over eclips vs monodevelop but CLI vs java is just not even a discussion worth having.
I know there is the capability for java vm to use other languages but, well, it dosen't.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643449</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft shill</title>
	<author>Vahokif</author>
	<datestamp>1247138820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have any proof of that?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have any proof of that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have any proof of that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28654663
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647493
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644479
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643299
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28650073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644949
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643737
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643897
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646881
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645253
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647013
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644521
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28654979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643597
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643675
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647593
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648097
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644237
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643675
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648791
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645573
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28649027
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643675
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28650995
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644263
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28653621
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643981
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643573
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643913
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28649121
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28652053
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646433
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644521
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28651849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643505
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643769
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643283
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646249
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28658457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647881
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28662693
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643977
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28652283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28670959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648399
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647935
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643337
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647343
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647631
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28655131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28655165
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647569
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647301
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_2131245_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643355
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643229
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644521
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28651849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28654979
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28653621
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644775
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644279
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644949
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28652283
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647935
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643505
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644391
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28652053
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643831
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643757
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645253
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643769
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644479
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647881
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643897
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643913
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643029
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643449
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644411
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643529
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644293
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645573
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646531
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646699
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28655165
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643597
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644237
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643887
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642971
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643139
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642933
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643309
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643283
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646249
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28658457
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647593
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643337
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647343
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643089
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643737
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646901
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643829
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643675
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28650995
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648791
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643299
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644263
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643125
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647013
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647585
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648559
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28670959
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28654663
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646881
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645035
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646427
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28649027
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28642945
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646331
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643573
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645947
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28655131
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28650073
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28645763
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28649121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647301
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28662693
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648919
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28643331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28646591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648399
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28648097
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647569
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_2131245.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28644121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_2131245.28647231
</commentlist>
</conversation>
