<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_10_1539206</id>
	<title>What Open Source Can Learn From Apple</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1247248980000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Linux and open source have long struggled to gain acceptance from the wider (read: non-technical) audience.  This has improved in recent years, but still has a long way to go.  Columnist Matt Asay suggests that perhaps open source projects should attempt to <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505\_3-10283780-16.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1\_3-0-5">emulate Apple's design philosophy</a>, with whoever succeeds becoming the "winner" of the hearts and minds of the vast majority of users.  <i>"Some projects already accomplish this to some extent. The strength of Mozilla, for example, is that it has figured out how to enable 40 percent of its development to be done by outside contributors, as BusinessWeek recently wrote. The downside is that these contributors are techies, but the upside is that they're techies who add language packs, accessibility features, and other "niche" areas that Mozilla might otherwise struggle to deliver.  This suggests a start: enable your open-source project to accept meaningful outside contributions that make the project reflective of a wider development community.  But the real goldmine is broadening the definition of "developer" to include lay users of your software. The day that I, as a nontechnical software user, can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux and open source have long struggled to gain acceptance from the wider ( read : non-technical ) audience .
This has improved in recent years , but still has a long way to go .
Columnist Matt Asay suggests that perhaps open source projects should attempt to emulate Apple 's design philosophy , with whoever succeeds becoming the " winner " of the hearts and minds of the vast majority of users .
" Some projects already accomplish this to some extent .
The strength of Mozilla , for example , is that it has figured out how to enable 40 percent of its development to be done by outside contributors , as BusinessWeek recently wrote .
The downside is that these contributors are techies , but the upside is that they 're techies who add language packs , accessibility features , and other " niche " areas that Mozilla might otherwise struggle to deliver .
This suggests a start : enable your open-source project to accept meaningful outside contributions that make the project reflective of a wider development community .
But the real goldmine is broadening the definition of " developer " to include lay users of your software .
The day that I , as a nontechnical software user , can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux and open source have long struggled to gain acceptance from the wider (read: non-technical) audience.
This has improved in recent years, but still has a long way to go.
Columnist Matt Asay suggests that perhaps open source projects should attempt to emulate Apple's design philosophy, with whoever succeeds becoming the "winner" of the hearts and minds of the vast majority of users.
"Some projects already accomplish this to some extent.
The strength of Mozilla, for example, is that it has figured out how to enable 40 percent of its development to be done by outside contributors, as BusinessWeek recently wrote.
The downside is that these contributors are techies, but the upside is that they're techies who add language packs, accessibility features, and other "niche" areas that Mozilla might otherwise struggle to deliver.
This suggests a start: enable your open-source project to accept meaningful outside contributions that make the project reflective of a wider development community.
But the real goldmine is broadening the definition of "developer" to include lay users of your software.
The day that I, as a nontechnical software user, can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655993</id>
	<title>simple explanation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247227860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What Open Source Can Learn From Apple</p></div><p>1. Advertise the hell outta your product
</p><p>2. Make it cool to the mainstream
</p><p>3. Make it more understandable to a non-computer person vs. a CS grad.
</p><p>4. Appear democratic when you're a dictatorship.
</p><p>5. Use the geeks fanboi as your propaganda tool. It's about BRAND.
<br>
Of course, open source will never reach those objectives, unless open source folks want to <i>make money</i>. It's not right or wrong, but a choice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What Open Source Can Learn From Apple1 .
Advertise the hell outta your product 2 .
Make it cool to the mainstream 3 .
Make it more understandable to a non-computer person vs. a CS grad .
4. Appear democratic when you 're a dictatorship .
5. Use the geeks fanboi as your propaganda tool .
It 's about BRAND .
Of course , open source will never reach those objectives , unless open source folks want to make money .
It 's not right or wrong , but a choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What Open Source Can Learn From Apple1.
Advertise the hell outta your product
2.
Make it cool to the mainstream
3.
Make it more understandable to a non-computer person vs. a CS grad.
4. Appear democratic when you're a dictatorship.
5. Use the geeks fanboi as your propaganda tool.
It's about BRAND.
Of course, open source will never reach those objectives, unless open source folks want to make money.
It's not right or wrong, but a choice.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</id>
	<title>user analytics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247252700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with the article that user involvement is key. However, users are clueless about what they really want and you can't possibly use them to write the specs of your product! On the other hand, developers tend to reject criticism from end-users because they lack technical expertise.</p><p>I can think of one approach that might work: build a really good analytics library that would measure various usability aspects. Applied to Firefox for instance, it could generate data on how the average user goes about finding a particular setting, how long it takes them to perform a given action, etc.</p><p>Developers would respect the hard, factual data that the analytics would generate. It would make it easier for the minority of usability engineers to argue against feature creep.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with the article that user involvement is key .
However , users are clueless about what they really want and you ca n't possibly use them to write the specs of your product !
On the other hand , developers tend to reject criticism from end-users because they lack technical expertise.I can think of one approach that might work : build a really good analytics library that would measure various usability aspects .
Applied to Firefox for instance , it could generate data on how the average user goes about finding a particular setting , how long it takes them to perform a given action , etc.Developers would respect the hard , factual data that the analytics would generate .
It would make it easier for the minority of usability engineers to argue against feature creep .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with the article that user involvement is key.
However, users are clueless about what they really want and you can't possibly use them to write the specs of your product!
On the other hand, developers tend to reject criticism from end-users because they lack technical expertise.I can think of one approach that might work: build a really good analytics library that would measure various usability aspects.
Applied to Firefox for instance, it could generate data on how the average user goes about finding a particular setting, how long it takes them to perform a given action, etc.Developers would respect the hard, factual data that the analytics would generate.
It would make it easier for the minority of usability engineers to argue against feature creep.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28674633</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247490840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Marketing actually encompasses a LOT of useful things, not just spin - and most F/OSS projects could REALLY use them.</i></p><p>And I have never seen evidence of one single solitary marketing person who contributed such talents to an F/OSS project. Ever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Marketing actually encompasses a LOT of useful things , not just spin - and most F/OSS projects could REALLY use them.And I have never seen evidence of one single solitary marketing person who contributed such talents to an F/OSS project .
Ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Marketing actually encompasses a LOT of useful things, not just spin - and most F/OSS projects could REALLY use them.And I have never seen evidence of one single solitary marketing person who contributed such talents to an F/OSS project.
Ever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658687</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Chief Camel Breeder</author>
	<datestamp>1247308980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Also, stop talking about programs being "stable." Isotopes are "stable." Programs either run well, or are buggy."</p></div></blockquote><p>Point of detail: users care a lot about <em>true</em> stability.</p><p>For argument's sake, define stability of a program as meaning that it always does the same thing for the same inputs and does something incrementally different for incrementally-different inputs. An unstable program is one that goes wrong at random, or for insignificant changes in the input; e.g. a contact list that accept all names except that it crashes if a name has an apostrophe.</p><p>For a user - me, for instance - instability is far worse than a feature that consistently broken. If something just doesn't work I try it once and then avoid it; but if it randomly blows my work away it's utterly toxic.</p><p>Developers in general seem to care more about fixing repeatably-broken features than unstable one, and this is <em>exactly the wrong approach</em> to satisfy users.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Also , stop talking about programs being " stable .
" Isotopes are " stable .
" Programs either run well , or are buggy .
" Point of detail : users care a lot about true stability.For argument 's sake , define stability of a program as meaning that it always does the same thing for the same inputs and does something incrementally different for incrementally-different inputs .
An unstable program is one that goes wrong at random , or for insignificant changes in the input ; e.g .
a contact list that accept all names except that it crashes if a name has an apostrophe.For a user - me , for instance - instability is far worse than a feature that consistently broken .
If something just does n't work I try it once and then avoid it ; but if it randomly blows my work away it 's utterly toxic.Developers in general seem to care more about fixing repeatably-broken features than unstable one , and this is exactly the wrong approach to satisfy users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Also, stop talking about programs being "stable.
" Isotopes are "stable.
" Programs either run well, or are buggy.
"Point of detail: users care a lot about true stability.For argument's sake, define stability of a program as meaning that it always does the same thing for the same inputs and does something incrementally different for incrementally-different inputs.
An unstable program is one that goes wrong at random, or for insignificant changes in the input; e.g.
a contact list that accept all names except that it crashes if a name has an apostrophe.For a user - me, for instance - instability is far worse than a feature that consistently broken.
If something just doesn't work I try it once and then avoid it; but if it randomly blows my work away it's utterly toxic.Developers in general seem to care more about fixing repeatably-broken features than unstable one, and this is exactly the wrong approach to satisfy users.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653303</id>
	<title>Completely misses the point about Apple design</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Soo, the author clearly has no idea what Apple's design philosophy is. Nothing in this article is even close to how Apple designs software. Users don't contribute to Apple's design. While Apple does solicit feedback regarding its current software, it strongly discourages (http://www.apple.com/legal/policies/ideas.html) idea submissions or other contributions to development. Steve Jobs once quoted Henry Ford regarding how they feel about what customers think they want: "If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." Apple doesn't care about what users say they want, because users don't think about product development the way Apple does. Apple hires very smart people and pushes them very hard to develop what they do. They're very focused on what they want to achieve and usually dream much bigger than the typical user or outside developer.</p><p>Basically, Apple's design philosophy is completely backwards from open source design philosophy, and I believe that's one of Apple's true strengths in its design process and what allows them to bring to market the breakthrough types of products that they do. There are many other design and engineering principles that are also fundamental to Apple's success, but bringing that to the open source world seems like a poor match.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Soo , the author clearly has no idea what Apple 's design philosophy is .
Nothing in this article is even close to how Apple designs software .
Users do n't contribute to Apple 's design .
While Apple does solicit feedback regarding its current software , it strongly discourages ( http : //www.apple.com/legal/policies/ideas.html ) idea submissions or other contributions to development .
Steve Jobs once quoted Henry Ford regarding how they feel about what customers think they want : " If I 'd asked my customers what they wanted , they 'd have said a faster horse .
" Apple does n't care about what users say they want , because users do n't think about product development the way Apple does .
Apple hires very smart people and pushes them very hard to develop what they do .
They 're very focused on what they want to achieve and usually dream much bigger than the typical user or outside developer.Basically , Apple 's design philosophy is completely backwards from open source design philosophy , and I believe that 's one of Apple 's true strengths in its design process and what allows them to bring to market the breakthrough types of products that they do .
There are many other design and engineering principles that are also fundamental to Apple 's success , but bringing that to the open source world seems like a poor match .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soo, the author clearly has no idea what Apple's design philosophy is.
Nothing in this article is even close to how Apple designs software.
Users don't contribute to Apple's design.
While Apple does solicit feedback regarding its current software, it strongly discourages (http://www.apple.com/legal/policies/ideas.html) idea submissions or other contributions to development.
Steve Jobs once quoted Henry Ford regarding how they feel about what customers think they want: "If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse.
" Apple doesn't care about what users say they want, because users don't think about product development the way Apple does.
Apple hires very smart people and pushes them very hard to develop what they do.
They're very focused on what they want to achieve and usually dream much bigger than the typical user or outside developer.Basically, Apple's design philosophy is completely backwards from open source design philosophy, and I believe that's one of Apple's true strengths in its design process and what allows them to bring to market the breakthrough types of products that they do.
There are many other design and engineering principles that are also fundamental to Apple's success, but bringing that to the open source world seems like a poor match.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653197</id>
	<title>Focus on what the user wants</title>
	<author>Thaelon</author>
	<datestamp>1247255040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spend time on the UI.</p><p>Make sure that <em>your software is the user's bitch, not the other way around</em>.</p><p>To elaborate, here are some tips:</p><ul> <li>Use zero modal dialogs. They force the user to act <em>at the software's behest</em> to continue doing what they want.  <em>Making the user your software's bitch.</em> </li><li>Make any reasonable action from one state as convenient as possible from that state to the most likely states.</li><li>Observe how your users use your software and modify it to make everything the do in it as easy and as fast as possible.</li><li>Just because it has a lot of functionality doesn't mean shit if it's too hard for them to figure out how to use it. Make it as intuitive, as logical, and as predictable as you can.</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spend time on the UI.Make sure that your software is the user 's bitch , not the other way around.To elaborate , here are some tips : Use zero modal dialogs .
They force the user to act at the software 's behest to continue doing what they want .
Making the user your software 's bitch .
Make any reasonable action from one state as convenient as possible from that state to the most likely states.Observe how your users use your software and modify it to make everything the do in it as easy and as fast as possible.Just because it has a lot of functionality does n't mean shit if it 's too hard for them to figure out how to use it .
Make it as intuitive , as logical , and as predictable as you can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spend time on the UI.Make sure that your software is the user's bitch, not the other way around.To elaborate, here are some tips: Use zero modal dialogs.
They force the user to act at the software's behest to continue doing what they want.
Making the user your software's bitch.
Make any reasonable action from one state as convenient as possible from that state to the most likely states.Observe how your users use your software and modify it to make everything the do in it as easy and as fast as possible.Just because it has a lot of functionality doesn't mean shit if it's too hard for them to figure out how to use it.
Make it as intuitive, as logical, and as predictable as you can.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654049</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>je ne sais quoi</author>
	<datestamp>1247258880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design. But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life. Does this make my input useless?</p></div></blockquote><p>

I'm a scientist who writes C code on a weekly or semi-weekly basis on average and have written a theme for e17 as well as done some writing some small "in house" type guis used for interface with instruments.  My bug reports to open source projects are largely ignored as well (to the point that I rarely issue one now).  But then again, Apple devs ignored all my complaints about the Finder when they removed the horizontal scroll bar from the Finder when you clicked on a special location awhile back too.  They had a vision of what they wanted to do and they did that and didn't care what I thought.  It's nothing to do with you, it's that open source developers are doing this usually for some small salary or part time and what they get paid to do is sometimes not what what you want them to do and there's only so many hours in a day.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm an IT professional , a power user , and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design .
But I 've never coded a line of C + + in my entire life .
Does this make my input useless ?
I 'm a scientist who writes C code on a weekly or semi-weekly basis on average and have written a theme for e17 as well as done some writing some small " in house " type guis used for interface with instruments .
My bug reports to open source projects are largely ignored as well ( to the point that I rarely issue one now ) .
But then again , Apple devs ignored all my complaints about the Finder when they removed the horizontal scroll bar from the Finder when you clicked on a special location awhile back too .
They had a vision of what they wanted to do and they did that and did n't care what I thought .
It 's nothing to do with you , it 's that open source developers are doing this usually for some small salary or part time and what they get paid to do is sometimes not what what you want them to do and there 's only so many hours in a day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design.
But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life.
Does this make my input useless?
I'm a scientist who writes C code on a weekly or semi-weekly basis on average and have written a theme for e17 as well as done some writing some small "in house" type guis used for interface with instruments.
My bug reports to open source projects are largely ignored as well (to the point that I rarely issue one now).
But then again, Apple devs ignored all my complaints about the Finder when they removed the horizontal scroll bar from the Finder when you clicked on a special location awhile back too.
They had a vision of what they wanted to do and they did that and didn't care what I thought.
It's nothing to do with you, it's that open source developers are doing this usually for some small salary or part time and what they get paid to do is sometimes not what what you want them to do and there's only so many hours in a day.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28657885</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1247250420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whats wrong with wanting that?  Nothing.</p><p>Whats wrong is that you act like its difficult to do.</p><p>If you remove greedy from the picture, producing that vehicle is pretty damn easy really.</p><p>SUV with room for 8 and 50 MPG?  Can be done right now, just requires you to use deasel fuel.  Under 12k?  No problem.  Get us back into an economy with a real backing standard to stop inflation and you'll get prices back down to something sane rather than the bullshit we have now.</p><p>Just because what customers want isn't something you want to produce doesn't make the customer wrong.  Just because you're incapable of accepting that it can be done doesn't make the customer wrong.</p><p>Your ignorance, greed, and absolutely shitty management ability is not the customers problem, its your problem, and its the reason you're failing Mr GM exec.</p><p>There is nothing in your statement that can't be done.  Nice try though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whats wrong with wanting that ?
Nothing.Whats wrong is that you act like its difficult to do.If you remove greedy from the picture , producing that vehicle is pretty damn easy really.SUV with room for 8 and 50 MPG ?
Can be done right now , just requires you to use deasel fuel .
Under 12k ?
No problem .
Get us back into an economy with a real backing standard to stop inflation and you 'll get prices back down to something sane rather than the bullshit we have now.Just because what customers want is n't something you want to produce does n't make the customer wrong .
Just because you 're incapable of accepting that it can be done does n't make the customer wrong.Your ignorance , greed , and absolutely shitty management ability is not the customers problem , its your problem , and its the reason you 're failing Mr GM exec.There is nothing in your statement that ca n't be done .
Nice try though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whats wrong with wanting that?
Nothing.Whats wrong is that you act like its difficult to do.If you remove greedy from the picture, producing that vehicle is pretty damn easy really.SUV with room for 8 and 50 MPG?
Can be done right now, just requires you to use deasel fuel.
Under 12k?
No problem.
Get us back into an economy with a real backing standard to stop inflation and you'll get prices back down to something sane rather than the bullshit we have now.Just because what customers want isn't something you want to produce doesn't make the customer wrong.
Just because you're incapable of accepting that it can be done doesn't make the customer wrong.Your ignorance, greed, and absolutely shitty management ability is not the customers problem, its your problem, and its the reason you're failing Mr GM exec.There is nothing in your statement that can't be done.
Nice try though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653027</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656467</id>
	<title>Re:One word</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247231820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Polish.</p></div><p>German.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Polish.German .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Polish.German.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653241</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655539</id>
	<title>Re:More whining from fashion designers</title>
	<author>gbarules2999</author>
	<datestamp>1247224500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They're not getting paid for it, they can't be fired for failure, so what do they care?</p></div><p>A hell of a lot of them are employed by someone, somewhere, nowadays, at least on the big projects.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not getting paid for it , they ca n't be fired for failure , so what do they care ? A hell of a lot of them are employed by someone , somewhere , nowadays , at least on the big projects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're not getting paid for it, they can't be fired for failure, so what do they care?A hell of a lot of them are employed by someone, somewhere, nowadays, at least on the big projects.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653457</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247256120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You forgot it also has to have a minimum 300hp engine.  Why?  Lord only knows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot it also has to have a minimum 300hp engine .
Why ? Lord only knows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot it also has to have a minimum 300hp engine.
Why?  Lord only knows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653027</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655101</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Actually, I do RTFA</author>
	<datestamp>1247221380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands. To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.</p></div></blockquote><p>Close.  To open source developers you are either (a) The developer himself, or (b) Not the developer himself.  If (b) then the excuse is either (i) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself, or (ii) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input.</p><blockquote><div><p>Open source is always talking about how they can win over more users. But how do you win over users if you don't focus on usability?</p></div></blockquote><p>You cannot!  Usability is very important.  And everyone should concentrate on it.  But not me right now, I just have this nifty little feature to add for myself/my close friend/etc.</p><p>Closed-source and other funded software can pay people for the unfun work of UI design and documentation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source 's attitude towards user demands .
To them you are either ( a ) a Programmer , or ( b ) a Grandma.Close .
To open source developers you are either ( a ) The developer himself , or ( b ) Not the developer himself .
If ( b ) then the excuse is either ( i ) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself , or ( ii ) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input.Open source is always talking about how they can win over more users .
But how do you win over users if you do n't focus on usability ? You can not !
Usability is very important .
And everyone should concentrate on it .
But not me right now , I just have this nifty little feature to add for myself/my close friend/etc.Closed-source and other funded software can pay people for the unfun work of UI design and documentation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands.
To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.Close.
To open source developers you are either (a) The developer himself, or (b) Not the developer himself.
If (b) then the excuse is either (i) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself, or (ii) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input.Open source is always talking about how they can win over more users.
But how do you win over users if you don't focus on usability?You cannot!
Usability is very important.
And everyone should concentrate on it.
But not me right now, I just have this nifty little feature to add for myself/my close friend/etc.Closed-source and other funded software can pay people for the unfun work of UI design and documentation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28657997</id>
	<title>My example: Tux Paint</title>
	<author>Bill Kendrick</author>
	<datestamp>1247252940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've got a "Help Us" page ( <a href="http://www.tuxpaint.org/help/" title="tuxpaint.org">http://www.tuxpaint.org/help/</a> [tuxpaint.org] ) that explains how contributors can help in all sorts of ways (code being only one). We keep the latest translation files online for easy download (no CVS needed), along with stats on how complete they are.</p><p>One of these days I'll get around to finishing the asset management web application I started working on, to make it really easy for graphics-oriented folks and photographers (and just folks who find usable PD and Creative Comments artwork) can collaborate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've got a " Help Us " page ( http : //www.tuxpaint.org/help/ [ tuxpaint.org ] ) that explains how contributors can help in all sorts of ways ( code being only one ) .
We keep the latest translation files online for easy download ( no CVS needed ) , along with stats on how complete they are.One of these days I 'll get around to finishing the asset management web application I started working on , to make it really easy for graphics-oriented folks and photographers ( and just folks who find usable PD and Creative Comments artwork ) can collaborate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've got a "Help Us" page ( http://www.tuxpaint.org/help/ [tuxpaint.org] ) that explains how contributors can help in all sorts of ways (code being only one).
We keep the latest translation files online for easy download (no CVS needed), along with stats on how complete they are.One of these days I'll get around to finishing the asset management web application I started working on, to make it really easy for graphics-oriented folks and photographers (and just folks who find usable PD and Creative Comments artwork) can collaborate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665325</id>
	<title>Re:Rebuttal quote</title>
	<author>Risen888</author>
	<datestamp>1247332500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't have any mod points right now, but this comment really deserves some. Thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have any mod points right now , but this comment really deserves some .
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have any mod points right now, but this comment really deserves some.
Thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654689</id>
	<title>Further</title>
	<author>PeanutButterBreath</author>
	<datestamp>1247218740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>1 out of 1(0) users know what they want and can express it.</p></div><p>5 out of 10 times they want something that can't be done.<br>4 out of 10 times they want something that can be done but shouldn't.<br>1 out of 10 times they want something both worthwhile and achievable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 out of 1 ( 0 ) users know what they want and can express it.5 out of 10 times they want something that ca n't be done.4 out of 10 times they want something that can be done but should n't.1 out of 10 times they want something both worthwhile and achievable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 out of 1(0) users know what they want and can express it.5 out of 10 times they want something that can't be done.4 out of 10 times they want something that can be done but shouldn't.1 out of 10 times they want something both worthwhile and achievable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653569</id>
	<title>Re:Downside?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247256540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't fly based on the make of the plane. I fly based on the customer service the airline offers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't fly based on the make of the plane .
I fly based on the customer service the airline offers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't fly based on the make of the plane.
I fly based on the customer service the airline offers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654767</id>
	<title>Absurd On Its Face</title>
	<author>reallocate</author>
	<datestamp>1247219220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>... users are clueless about what they really want...</i></p><p>That's absurd on the face of it.  In my experience, users almost always know exactly what they want.  The problem is that the don't speak tech, and techies don't know how, and often don't want, to communicate usefully with users.  Techies keep using words like "specs" and "requirements", etc.  Write the specs and then move on to the real fun.  They want to use tech to measure all sorts of irrelevant things, as if people really decide they like or hate some piece of software because their mouse moves 0.54 centimeters less. People don't even notice things like that.</p><p>The way to find out what users want is to pay attention to how they do the job they want the software to do. Learn how users spend their time.  Learn what they see as important.  Learn the roadblocks. Sit with them at their desks 8 hours a day for a week.  Take lots of notes.  Then, go off and think.  When you're done, come back with a rough sketch of what your code could do for them.  Ask things like, "If you could do this, would that be useful?".  Take more notes. Rinse and repeat.  Write real code.  Enlist willing users to test code, not to see if it works -- you better already know that -- but to see if they like it. Rinse and repeat some more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; ... users are clueless about what they really want...That 's absurd on the face of it .
In my experience , users almost always know exactly what they want .
The problem is that the do n't speak tech , and techies do n't know how , and often do n't want , to communicate usefully with users .
Techies keep using words like " specs " and " requirements " , etc .
Write the specs and then move on to the real fun .
They want to use tech to measure all sorts of irrelevant things , as if people really decide they like or hate some piece of software because their mouse moves 0.54 centimeters less .
People do n't even notice things like that.The way to find out what users want is to pay attention to how they do the job they want the software to do .
Learn how users spend their time .
Learn what they see as important .
Learn the roadblocks .
Sit with them at their desks 8 hours a day for a week .
Take lots of notes .
Then , go off and think .
When you 're done , come back with a rough sketch of what your code could do for them .
Ask things like , " If you could do this , would that be useful ? " .
Take more notes .
Rinse and repeat .
Write real code .
Enlist willing users to test code , not to see if it works -- you better already know that -- but to see if they like it .
Rinse and repeat some more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; ... users are clueless about what they really want...That's absurd on the face of it.
In my experience, users almost always know exactly what they want.
The problem is that the don't speak tech, and techies don't know how, and often don't want, to communicate usefully with users.
Techies keep using words like "specs" and "requirements", etc.
Write the specs and then move on to the real fun.
They want to use tech to measure all sorts of irrelevant things, as if people really decide they like or hate some piece of software because their mouse moves 0.54 centimeters less.
People don't even notice things like that.The way to find out what users want is to pay attention to how they do the job they want the software to do.
Learn how users spend their time.
Learn what they see as important.
Learn the roadblocks.
Sit with them at their desks 8 hours a day for a week.
Take lots of notes.
Then, go off and think.
When you're done, come back with a rough sketch of what your code could do for them.
Ask things like, "If you could do this, would that be useful?".
Take more notes.
Rinse and repeat.
Write real code.
Enlist willing users to test code, not to see if it works -- you better already know that -- but to see if they like it.
Rinse and repeat some more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119</id>
	<title>More whining from fashion designers</title>
	<author>0xdeadbeef</author>
	<datestamp>1247254740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The more complicated a product gets, the more technical acumen is required to put it together. Bad Web sites are built by people who know how to code HTML and JavaScript but don't understand how people use the Web. Bad software is written by people who are experts at knowing how a computer works and how to write code to make it do what they want, but no idea about how regular people behave and how those people expect to interact with that software.</p></div></blockquote><p>This is bullshit. Bad websites are built people who barely know how to use HTML and Javascript, but believe that the more HTML and Javascript you use, the better the website is. Slashdot, Digg, Gizmodo, Endgadget, Facebook, MySpace - they're all fucking horrible. People believe that because Google can pull it off, they can too. They believe that because they have very fast machines, everyone else does too. The believe that "moar interactive" == "awesome website", and that the more iframes you can pull into one page makes it a "mashup" and very "Web 2.0".</p><p>Do you see that kind of shit on the Apple website? Of course not! Apple doesn't succeed because of "design", they succeed because they have production values. They don't tolerate "good enough", they don't fixate on technology because it is new, they don't march to the beat of an ideological imperative. They believe in themselves, and they do what they want because they like it, on the assumption that their tastes are like everyone's tastes. Apple does not live by focus groups. Apple doesn't hold "design" over "technology", they hold "simple" over "complicated". The design wankers attach themselves to Apple's coattails because they can't differentiate between pretty technology and well executed technology. They don't understand technology, so they make a religion out of design so their priests can have something to lord over the unfashionable nerds.</p><p>Do you know why so much open source software sucks? It's because the programmers suck! They don't measure themselves against any standard of excellence. They stop when something works, ignoring the fact that it doesn't work <i>well</i>. It's plain old slob <i>apathy</i>. They're not getting paid for it, they can't be fired for failure, so what do they care?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The more complicated a product gets , the more technical acumen is required to put it together .
Bad Web sites are built by people who know how to code HTML and JavaScript but do n't understand how people use the Web .
Bad software is written by people who are experts at knowing how a computer works and how to write code to make it do what they want , but no idea about how regular people behave and how those people expect to interact with that software.This is bullshit .
Bad websites are built people who barely know how to use HTML and Javascript , but believe that the more HTML and Javascript you use , the better the website is .
Slashdot , Digg , Gizmodo , Endgadget , Facebook , MySpace - they 're all fucking horrible .
People believe that because Google can pull it off , they can too .
They believe that because they have very fast machines , everyone else does too .
The believe that " moar interactive " = = " awesome website " , and that the more iframes you can pull into one page makes it a " mashup " and very " Web 2.0 " .Do you see that kind of shit on the Apple website ?
Of course not !
Apple does n't succeed because of " design " , they succeed because they have production values .
They do n't tolerate " good enough " , they do n't fixate on technology because it is new , they do n't march to the beat of an ideological imperative .
They believe in themselves , and they do what they want because they like it , on the assumption that their tastes are like everyone 's tastes .
Apple does not live by focus groups .
Apple does n't hold " design " over " technology " , they hold " simple " over " complicated " .
The design wankers attach themselves to Apple 's coattails because they ca n't differentiate between pretty technology and well executed technology .
They do n't understand technology , so they make a religion out of design so their priests can have something to lord over the unfashionable nerds.Do you know why so much open source software sucks ?
It 's because the programmers suck !
They do n't measure themselves against any standard of excellence .
They stop when something works , ignoring the fact that it does n't work well .
It 's plain old slob apathy .
They 're not getting paid for it , they ca n't be fired for failure , so what do they care ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The more complicated a product gets, the more technical acumen is required to put it together.
Bad Web sites are built by people who know how to code HTML and JavaScript but don't understand how people use the Web.
Bad software is written by people who are experts at knowing how a computer works and how to write code to make it do what they want, but no idea about how regular people behave and how those people expect to interact with that software.This is bullshit.
Bad websites are built people who barely know how to use HTML and Javascript, but believe that the more HTML and Javascript you use, the better the website is.
Slashdot, Digg, Gizmodo, Endgadget, Facebook, MySpace - they're all fucking horrible.
People believe that because Google can pull it off, they can too.
They believe that because they have very fast machines, everyone else does too.
The believe that "moar interactive" == "awesome website", and that the more iframes you can pull into one page makes it a "mashup" and very "Web 2.0".Do you see that kind of shit on the Apple website?
Of course not!
Apple doesn't succeed because of "design", they succeed because they have production values.
They don't tolerate "good enough", they don't fixate on technology because it is new, they don't march to the beat of an ideological imperative.
They believe in themselves, and they do what they want because they like it, on the assumption that their tastes are like everyone's tastes.
Apple does not live by focus groups.
Apple doesn't hold "design" over "technology", they hold "simple" over "complicated".
The design wankers attach themselves to Apple's coattails because they can't differentiate between pretty technology and well executed technology.
They don't understand technology, so they make a religion out of design so their priests can have something to lord over the unfashionable nerds.Do you know why so much open source software sucks?
It's because the programmers suck!
They don't measure themselves against any standard of excellence.
They stop when something works, ignoring the fact that it doesn't work well.
It's plain old slob apathy.
They're not getting paid for it, they can't be fired for failure, so what do they care?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665249</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Risen888</author>
	<datestamp>1247331360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands. To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.</p><p>I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design. But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life. Does this make my input useless?</p><p>For example, I've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability, but the development team doesn't seem to care.</p></div><p>While I very much identify with your self-description there, and agree with the sentiment and frustration you express, I think you're wrong to throw it out as a blanket criticism of free software as a whole. Mozilla, sure. I've always thought of the Mozilla projects as a good example of "free but not open," that is, the code is free, but the process is non-inclusive. If you've got a reproducible bug, they might be interested, but a usability complaint? Forget it. You can paint it as "they're not interested" or "they're too busy" or whatever, but you're just banging your head against the wall. (And as another replier to your comment mentioned, that's not a "free software thing," it's just a "big organization thing." you'd get just as much satisfaction trying to send in a usability comment about MS Outlook.)</p><p>On the other hand, I've had much better experiences sending in wishlist items or usability comments to smaller projects (assuming the developer isn't just a douchebag).</p><p>YMMV.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source 's attitude towards user demands .
To them you are either ( a ) a Programmer , or ( b ) a Grandma.I 'm an IT professional , a power user , and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design .
But I 've never coded a line of C + + in my entire life .
Does this make my input useless ? For example , I 've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability , but the development team does n't seem to care.While I very much identify with your self-description there , and agree with the sentiment and frustration you express , I think you 're wrong to throw it out as a blanket criticism of free software as a whole .
Mozilla , sure .
I 've always thought of the Mozilla projects as a good example of " free but not open , " that is , the code is free , but the process is non-inclusive .
If you 've got a reproducible bug , they might be interested , but a usability complaint ?
Forget it .
You can paint it as " they 're not interested " or " they 're too busy " or whatever , but you 're just banging your head against the wall .
( And as another replier to your comment mentioned , that 's not a " free software thing , " it 's just a " big organization thing .
" you 'd get just as much satisfaction trying to send in a usability comment about MS Outlook .
) On the other hand , I 've had much better experiences sending in wishlist items or usability comments to smaller projects ( assuming the developer is n't just a douchebag ) .YMMV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands.
To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design.
But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life.
Does this make my input useless?For example, I've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability, but the development team doesn't seem to care.While I very much identify with your self-description there, and agree with the sentiment and frustration you express, I think you're wrong to throw it out as a blanket criticism of free software as a whole.
Mozilla, sure.
I've always thought of the Mozilla projects as a good example of "free but not open," that is, the code is free, but the process is non-inclusive.
If you've got a reproducible bug, they might be interested, but a usability complaint?
Forget it.
You can paint it as "they're not interested" or "they're too busy" or whatever, but you're just banging your head against the wall.
(And as another replier to your comment mentioned, that's not a "free software thing," it's just a "big organization thing.
" you'd get just as much satisfaction trying to send in a usability comment about MS Outlook.
)On the other hand, I've had much better experiences sending in wishlist items or usability comments to smaller projects (assuming the developer isn't just a douchebag).YMMV.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653595</id>
	<title>Apple is the bipolar opposite of open source</title>
	<author>goffster</author>
	<datestamp>1247256600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple is one man's dream, and it will die with that man.<br>Open Source will outlive any particular person.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is one man 's dream , and it will die with that man.Open Source will outlive any particular person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple is one man's dream, and it will die with that man.Open Source will outlive any particular person.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653241</id>
	<title>One word</title>
	<author>PhotoGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1247255160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Polish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Polish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Polish.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659313</id>
	<title>Share</title>
	<author>pogson</author>
	<datestamp>1247321460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If Apple has to spend a bundle on marketing to get the meagre share they have, why has GNU/Linux twice the share? Could it be that its not about marketing only but price also matters?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Apple has to spend a bundle on marketing to get the meagre share they have , why has GNU/Linux twice the share ?
Could it be that its not about marketing only but price also matters ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Apple has to spend a bundle on marketing to get the meagre share they have, why has GNU/Linux twice the share?
Could it be that its not about marketing only but price also matters?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654603</id>
	<title>Pigs fly!</title>
	<author>clang\_jangle</author>
	<datestamp>1247218320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The day that I, as a nontechnical software user, can meaningfully participate in an open-source project...</p></div></blockquote><p>...will be one cold day in hell. Seriously, I don't mean to be harsh, but coding takes knowledge of coding. All the well-meaning non-coding critics in the world will never be able to offer anything but suggestions and testing until they learn to code. Most people can't even file a bug report properly.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The day that I , as a nontechnical software user , can meaningfully participate in an open-source project......will be one cold day in hell .
Seriously , I do n't mean to be harsh , but coding takes knowledge of coding .
All the well-meaning non-coding critics in the world will never be able to offer anything but suggestions and testing until they learn to code .
Most people ca n't even file a bug report properly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The day that I, as a nontechnical software user, can meaningfully participate in an open-source project......will be one cold day in hell.
Seriously, I don't mean to be harsh, but coding takes knowledge of coding.
All the well-meaning non-coding critics in the world will never be able to offer anything but suggestions and testing until they learn to code.
Most people can't even file a bug report properly.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658027</id>
	<title>Re:It's about marketing</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1247253480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, apple has good marketing, I got that.</p><p>Microsoft<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... good marketing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... what the fuck planet are you one?  On Earth, MS has shitty marketing as everyone knows.</p><p>Both Apple and MS's successful products are successful because they provide enough of what users want/need to keep them as users.</p><p>Linux does as well, the difference is it provides for the needs of a select view bunch of geeks and wanna be geeks who think that using Linux and going out of their way to do things the hardware makes it better.  There are far fewer of these types of people in the world than everyone else.</p><p>While you are right, we live in a society driven by media, but thinking that the only reason OSS has utterly failed to penetrate the market is because of marketing is just silly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , apple has good marketing , I got that.Microsoft ... good marketing ... what the fuck planet are you one ?
On Earth , MS has shitty marketing as everyone knows.Both Apple and MS 's successful products are successful because they provide enough of what users want/need to keep them as users.Linux does as well , the difference is it provides for the needs of a select view bunch of geeks and wan na be geeks who think that using Linux and going out of their way to do things the hardware makes it better .
There are far fewer of these types of people in the world than everyone else.While you are right , we live in a society driven by media , but thinking that the only reason OSS has utterly failed to penetrate the market is because of marketing is just silly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, apple has good marketing, I got that.Microsoft ... good marketing ... what the fuck planet are you one?
On Earth, MS has shitty marketing as everyone knows.Both Apple and MS's successful products are successful because they provide enough of what users want/need to keep them as users.Linux does as well, the difference is it provides for the needs of a select view bunch of geeks and wanna be geeks who think that using Linux and going out of their way to do things the hardware makes it better.
There are far fewer of these types of people in the world than everyone else.While you are right, we live in a society driven by media, but thinking that the only reason OSS has utterly failed to penetrate the market is because of marketing is just silly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653931</id>
	<title>Ironically, Apple has benefitted immensely from OS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247258220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple took good advantage of the portability and generous licensing of open source software and based huge swaths of OS X on long established projects such as BSD and Mach.  Then by grafting on a tightly controlled series of entirely proprietary application interfaces, they were able to ensure that while code flows easily and readily from Linux and FreeBSD to OS X, it is almost impossible for them to flow back.  That is why you see so few truly cross platform open source desktop applications that originated on OS X but also run on other platforms.  It also explains the plethora of OS X-only forks of popular open source applications such as Firefox and OpenOffice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple took good advantage of the portability and generous licensing of open source software and based huge swaths of OS X on long established projects such as BSD and Mach .
Then by grafting on a tightly controlled series of entirely proprietary application interfaces , they were able to ensure that while code flows easily and readily from Linux and FreeBSD to OS X , it is almost impossible for them to flow back .
That is why you see so few truly cross platform open source desktop applications that originated on OS X but also run on other platforms .
It also explains the plethora of OS X-only forks of popular open source applications such as Firefox and OpenOffice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple took good advantage of the portability and generous licensing of open source software and based huge swaths of OS X on long established projects such as BSD and Mach.
Then by grafting on a tightly controlled series of entirely proprietary application interfaces, they were able to ensure that while code flows easily and readily from Linux and FreeBSD to OS X, it is almost impossible for them to flow back.
That is why you see so few truly cross platform open source desktop applications that originated on OS X but also run on other platforms.
It also explains the plethora of OS X-only forks of popular open source applications such as Firefox and OpenOffice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655225</id>
	<title>Re:One word</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247222280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WTF do people from Poland have to do with delivering great open source software? Are there great coders in Poland? Should OSS outsource to Poland?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF do people from Poland have to do with delivering great open source software ?
Are there great coders in Poland ?
Should OSS outsource to Poland ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF do people from Poland have to do with delivering great open source software?
Are there great coders in Poland?
Should OSS outsource to Poland?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653241</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654557</id>
	<title>Re:More whining from fashion designers</title>
	<author>darkvizier</author>
	<datestamp>1247218080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bravo!  That's pretty spot on.<br> <br>

I'd like to add though, that you can't really get there from here.  Open source contributors are there for their own reasons, and they are free to leave at any time.  If you take a top-down approach and try to enforce some absolutes on people, they'll give you the bird or just laugh and walk away.<br> <br>

In order to herd these cats, you have to convince them that they want what you want.  That it will be a rewarding experience to produce a high quality product.  In a company you can take a brute force approach to management through the threat of firing your employees.  What open source is missing is a revenue stream.  Until there is a path for money to get in, there will be no incentive for a good product to come out.  Some innovations in business are required before we can really see open source come to it's full potential.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bravo !
That 's pretty spot on .
I 'd like to add though , that you ca n't really get there from here .
Open source contributors are there for their own reasons , and they are free to leave at any time .
If you take a top-down approach and try to enforce some absolutes on people , they 'll give you the bird or just laugh and walk away .
In order to herd these cats , you have to convince them that they want what you want .
That it will be a rewarding experience to produce a high quality product .
In a company you can take a brute force approach to management through the threat of firing your employees .
What open source is missing is a revenue stream .
Until there is a path for money to get in , there will be no incentive for a good product to come out .
Some innovations in business are required before we can really see open source come to it 's full potential .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bravo!
That's pretty spot on.
I'd like to add though, that you can't really get there from here.
Open source contributors are there for their own reasons, and they are free to leave at any time.
If you take a top-down approach and try to enforce some absolutes on people, they'll give you the bird or just laugh and walk away.
In order to herd these cats, you have to convince them that they want what you want.
That it will be a rewarding experience to produce a high quality product.
In a company you can take a brute force approach to management through the threat of firing your employees.
What open source is missing is a revenue stream.
Until there is a path for money to get in, there will be no incentive for a good product to come out.
Some innovations in business are required before we can really see open source come to it's full potential.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666729</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247404740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; They had a vision of what they wanted to do and they did that and didn't care what I thought</p><p>And there in lies another problem -- end users (and particularly techy IT people) always think that what they want is what everyone else wants.</p><p>Large companies like Apple have many many millions of users that they have to keep happy. Assuming that your 'solution' solves all problems for all users is naive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; They had a vision of what they wanted to do and they did that and did n't care what I thoughtAnd there in lies another problem -- end users ( and particularly techy IT people ) always think that what they want is what everyone else wants.Large companies like Apple have many many millions of users that they have to keep happy .
Assuming that your 'solution ' solves all problems for all users is naive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; They had a vision of what they wanted to do and they did that and didn't care what I thoughtAnd there in lies another problem -- end users (and particularly techy IT people) always think that what they want is what everyone else wants.Large companies like Apple have many many millions of users that they have to keep happy.
Assuming that your 'solution' solves all problems for all users is naive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665689</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247339340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I've worked with people who have no idea what Silverlight is or does, but they want it cuz it sounds cool and has something to do with the Web.</p></div></blockquote><p>I've seen people sing about Songsmith, because it's the "cool new thing".</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oGFogwcx-E" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oGFogwcx-E</a> [youtube.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've worked with people who have no idea what Silverlight is or does , but they want it cuz it sounds cool and has something to do with the Web.I 've seen people sing about Songsmith , because it 's the " cool new thing " .http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 3oGFogwcx-E [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've worked with people who have no idea what Silverlight is or does, but they want it cuz it sounds cool and has something to do with the Web.I've seen people sing about Songsmith, because it's the "cool new thing".http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oGFogwcx-E [youtube.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658817</id>
	<title>Re:Focus on what the user wants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247311320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I avoid open-source software (on OS X) because of the UI. Its not pleasant to look at, and neither does it work like other OS X apps. Look at GIMP, for an example. First sign of a bad UI is that it doesn't use the menu bar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I avoid open-source software ( on OS X ) because of the UI .
Its not pleasant to look at , and neither does it work like other OS X apps .
Look at GIMP , for an example .
First sign of a bad UI is that it does n't use the menu bar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I avoid open-source software (on OS X) because of the UI.
Its not pleasant to look at, and neither does it work like other OS X apps.
Look at GIMP, for an example.
First sign of a bad UI is that it doesn't use the menu bar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655111</id>
	<title>Re:False start</title>
	<author>doulos05</author>
	<datestamp>1247221380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The day that I, as a nontechnical software user, can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won.</p><p>Show me an instance of this with Apple. In fact, I would argue the opposite - that their strict control of the platform has allowed them to focus on only approving software that specifically fits the customer's needs the best. As apposed to the open source model which is one tool, a million uses. With apple you get the universal 1-piece screw driver. With open source you get the Craftsmen all-in-one screw driver with 36 bits and 6 handles in 4 colors.</p></div><p>From my (admittedly) brief review of the article, it seems like logic to the argument went like this:</p><ol> <li>I like open source stuff, it's nice, but</li><li>I wish it were developed for less technically-minded people. Not for developers.</li><li>Apple develops their stuff for less technically-minded people.</li><li>And open source lets anybody contribute.</li><li>I like the way Apple programs run.</li><li>I wish I could make open source stuff look like Apple programs</li><li>One day, open souce will be just like Apple and let everyone contribute. Then they'll win.</li></ol><p>I've got to admit, I feel like I must have missed a few connecting arguments in there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The day that I , as a nontechnical software user , can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won.Show me an instance of this with Apple .
In fact , I would argue the opposite - that their strict control of the platform has allowed them to focus on only approving software that specifically fits the customer 's needs the best .
As apposed to the open source model which is one tool , a million uses .
With apple you get the universal 1-piece screw driver .
With open source you get the Craftsmen all-in-one screw driver with 36 bits and 6 handles in 4 colors.From my ( admittedly ) brief review of the article , it seems like logic to the argument went like this : I like open source stuff , it 's nice , butI wish it were developed for less technically-minded people .
Not for developers.Apple develops their stuff for less technically-minded people.And open source lets anybody contribute.I like the way Apple programs run.I wish I could make open source stuff look like Apple programsOne day , open souce will be just like Apple and let everyone contribute .
Then they 'll win.I 've got to admit , I feel like I must have missed a few connecting arguments in there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The day that I, as a nontechnical software user, can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won.Show me an instance of this with Apple.
In fact, I would argue the opposite - that their strict control of the platform has allowed them to focus on only approving software that specifically fits the customer's needs the best.
As apposed to the open source model which is one tool, a million uses.
With apple you get the universal 1-piece screw driver.
With open source you get the Craftsmen all-in-one screw driver with 36 bits and 6 handles in 4 colors.From my (admittedly) brief review of the article, it seems like logic to the argument went like this: I like open source stuff, it's nice, butI wish it were developed for less technically-minded people.
Not for developers.Apple develops their stuff for less technically-minded people.And open source lets anybody contribute.I like the way Apple programs run.I wish I could make open source stuff look like Apple programsOne day, open souce will be just like Apple and let everyone contribute.
Then they'll win.I've got to admit, I feel like I must have missed a few connecting arguments in there.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656551</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>schnell</author>
	<datestamp>1247232780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Fuck marketing! Just give people the free and open truth.</p></div><p>Let me guess<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... you're an engineer?</p><p>Seriously, I think the problem here is you are confusing <i>marketing</i> with <i>spin</i>. Marketing actually encompasses a LOT of useful things, not just spin - and most F/OSS projects could REALLY use them. The definition of marketing includes:</p><ul>
<li> Competitive analysis (what do competing products do? are we ahead or behind?)</li>
<li> Market research (how many people use this/want this/care about this? do they want something different?)</li>
<li> Product management (what do our customers want us to build? what can we really build?)</li>
<li> Reporting and analysis (how are we doing? what can we learn from the buying behavior of our customers?)</li>
<li> Public relations and press/analyst relations (how can we get correct info to reporters, bloggers, analysts and get them to write about it?)</li>
<li> Branding, advertising and customer communications (how can we tell customers about this and make it sound appealing?)</li>
</ul><p>It's a common mistake among technical people to think that marketing only includes that last item. Just like many sales or marketing people misunderstand what "technical people" do...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck marketing !
Just give people the free and open truth.Let me guess ... you 're an engineer ? Seriously , I think the problem here is you are confusing marketing with spin .
Marketing actually encompasses a LOT of useful things , not just spin - and most F/OSS projects could REALLY use them .
The definition of marketing includes : Competitive analysis ( what do competing products do ?
are we ahead or behind ?
) Market research ( how many people use this/want this/care about this ?
do they want something different ?
) Product management ( what do our customers want us to build ?
what can we really build ?
) Reporting and analysis ( how are we doing ?
what can we learn from the buying behavior of our customers ?
) Public relations and press/analyst relations ( how can we get correct info to reporters , bloggers , analysts and get them to write about it ?
) Branding , advertising and customer communications ( how can we tell customers about this and make it sound appealing ?
) It 's a common mistake among technical people to think that marketing only includes that last item .
Just like many sales or marketing people misunderstand what " technical people " do.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck marketing!
Just give people the free and open truth.Let me guess ... you're an engineer?Seriously, I think the problem here is you are confusing marketing with spin.
Marketing actually encompasses a LOT of useful things, not just spin - and most F/OSS projects could REALLY use them.
The definition of marketing includes:
 Competitive analysis (what do competing products do?
are we ahead or behind?
)
 Market research (how many people use this/want this/care about this?
do they want something different?
)
 Product management (what do our customers want us to build?
what can we really build?
)
 Reporting and analysis (how are we doing?
what can we learn from the buying behavior of our customers?
)
 Public relations and press/analyst relations (how can we get correct info to reporters, bloggers, analysts and get them to write about it?
)
 Branding, advertising and customer communications (how can we tell customers about this and make it sound appealing?
)
It's a common mistake among technical people to think that marketing only includes that last item.
Just like many sales or marketing people misunderstand what "technical people" do...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659699</id>
	<title>Re:Apple is the bipolar opposite of open source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247325120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure 'they' thought the same thing about Henry Ford.... and Preston Tucker</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure 'they ' thought the same thing about Henry Ford.... and Preston Tucker</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure 'they' thought the same thing about Henry Ford.... and Preston Tucker</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653595</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653839</id>
	<title>Apple engages users?</title>
	<author>edmicman</author>
	<datestamp>1247257800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait, what?  Apple engages the user community to develop they're products?  Are you sure they don't limit the featureset, tell the users what they want, spend $$ on marketing, and then watch the bank roll in while everyone covets the "new" old product?</p><p>I agree, OSS should take a page from Apple's UI and design philosophy.  But I don't think involving every Tom, Dick, and Harry to offer input (although, that is necessary, too, I think) and hold the same weight works at the same time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , what ?
Apple engages the user community to develop they 're products ?
Are you sure they do n't limit the featureset , tell the users what they want , spend $ $ on marketing , and then watch the bank roll in while everyone covets the " new " old product ? I agree , OSS should take a page from Apple 's UI and design philosophy .
But I do n't think involving every Tom , Dick , and Harry to offer input ( although , that is necessary , too , I think ) and hold the same weight works at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, what?
Apple engages the user community to develop they're products?
Are you sure they don't limit the featureset, tell the users what they want, spend $$ on marketing, and then watch the bank roll in while everyone covets the "new" old product?I agree, OSS should take a page from Apple's UI and design philosophy.
But I don't think involving every Tom, Dick, and Harry to offer input (although, that is necessary, too, I think) and hold the same weight works at the same time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</id>
	<title>I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247254920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF, IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM, and, especially, The GIMP.  Also, stop talking about programs being "stable."  Isotopes are "stable."  Programs either run well, or are buggy.</p><p>People mock Microsoft, but I tell ya... I've worked with people who have no idea what Silverlight is or does, but they want it cuz it sounds cool and has something to do with the Web.  It's almost as if Linux developers go out of their way to be non-MS in everything -- including creating marketable names for their wares.</p><p>The problem, of course, is that the same guys doing the codewriting are the same guys doing the naming and marketing ("...because, after all, I've written the code, and that's the tough part that really matters, right?  And if people don't get the Linus/Stallman/Montypython joke upon which I've based the app's name, then fuck 'em, who needs 'em, I'm only doing it for love anyway...").</p><p>Why isn't there any open-source marketing?  Maybe some of the  bigger projects could reach out to some university business and marketing students who could take on the work in much the same way they attract coders?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF , IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM , and , especially , The GIMP .
Also , stop talking about programs being " stable .
" Isotopes are " stable .
" Programs either run well , or are buggy.People mock Microsoft , but I tell ya... I 've worked with people who have no idea what Silverlight is or does , but they want it cuz it sounds cool and has something to do with the Web .
It 's almost as if Linux developers go out of their way to be non-MS in everything -- including creating marketable names for their wares.The problem , of course , is that the same guys doing the codewriting are the same guys doing the naming and marketing ( " ...because , after all , I 've written the code , and that 's the tough part that really matters , right ?
And if people do n't get the Linus/Stallman/Montypython joke upon which I 've based the app 's name , then fuck 'em , who needs 'em , I 'm only doing it for love anyway... " ) .Why is n't there any open-source marketing ?
Maybe some of the bigger projects could reach out to some university business and marketing students who could take on the work in much the same way they attract coders ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF, IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM, and, especially, The GIMP.
Also, stop talking about programs being "stable.
"  Isotopes are "stable.
"  Programs either run well, or are buggy.People mock Microsoft, but I tell ya... I've worked with people who have no idea what Silverlight is or does, but they want it cuz it sounds cool and has something to do with the Web.
It's almost as if Linux developers go out of their way to be non-MS in everything -- including creating marketable names for their wares.The problem, of course, is that the same guys doing the codewriting are the same guys doing the naming and marketing ("...because, after all, I've written the code, and that's the tough part that really matters, right?
And if people don't get the Linus/Stallman/Montypython joke upon which I've based the app's name, then fuck 'em, who needs 'em, I'm only doing it for love anyway...").Why isn't there any open-source marketing?
Maybe some of the  bigger projects could reach out to some university business and marketing students who could take on the work in much the same way they attract coders?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654081</id>
	<title>Re:It's about marketing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247259000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What keeps Apple and Microsoft on top is marketing and momentum. We live in a society driven by mass media. <strong>For the most part open-source does not have a sufficient marketing budget.</strong> Most people do not even know about alternatives.</p></div><p>Apple is open-source's marketing budget. Just because its not GNU/linux or GPL doesn't mean its not open source.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What keeps Apple and Microsoft on top is marketing and momentum .
We live in a society driven by mass media .
For the most part open-source does not have a sufficient marketing budget .
Most people do not even know about alternatives.Apple is open-source 's marketing budget .
Just because its not GNU/linux or GPL does n't mean its not open source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What keeps Apple and Microsoft on top is marketing and momentum.
We live in a society driven by mass media.
For the most part open-source does not have a sufficient marketing budget.
Most people do not even know about alternatives.Apple is open-source's marketing budget.
Just because its not GNU/linux or GPL doesn't mean its not open source.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656387</id>
	<title>Marketing 'humanizes' programs..</title>
	<author>msimm</author>
	<datestamp>1247231100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the truth is often developers care less for end users (or have less time or patience) then one might think. In a business environment this tends to have less impact because somewhere in the chain people who aren't the programmers will be included and some missing or poorly designed elements will be addressed. In open source projects there isn't really much marketing and from what I've seen even a little resentment towards the very idea, the 'scratching an itch' model often results in projects which seem actively hostel towards much of its own user-base, and why shouldn't they be, it's their time and their itch. Hopefully as the mainstreaming of open source continues the developers involved in may of these projects will become more interested in their respective user bases and a lot of the trouble is probably that it's actually really hard to process feedback so many developers simply assume that because users can't always express themselves accurately that they don't know what it is that they want: communication is tough and not all talented programmers are such talented people persons.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the truth is often developers care less for end users ( or have less time or patience ) then one might think .
In a business environment this tends to have less impact because somewhere in the chain people who are n't the programmers will be included and some missing or poorly designed elements will be addressed .
In open source projects there is n't really much marketing and from what I 've seen even a little resentment towards the very idea , the 'scratching an itch ' model often results in projects which seem actively hostel towards much of its own user-base , and why should n't they be , it 's their time and their itch .
Hopefully as the mainstreaming of open source continues the developers involved in may of these projects will become more interested in their respective user bases and a lot of the trouble is probably that it 's actually really hard to process feedback so many developers simply assume that because users ca n't always express themselves accurately that they do n't know what it is that they want : communication is tough and not all talented programmers are such talented people persons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the truth is often developers care less for end users (or have less time or patience) then one might think.
In a business environment this tends to have less impact because somewhere in the chain people who aren't the programmers will be included and some missing or poorly designed elements will be addressed.
In open source projects there isn't really much marketing and from what I've seen even a little resentment towards the very idea, the 'scratching an itch' model often results in projects which seem actively hostel towards much of its own user-base, and why shouldn't they be, it's their time and their itch.
Hopefully as the mainstreaming of open source continues the developers involved in may of these projects will become more interested in their respective user bases and a lot of the trouble is probably that it's actually really hard to process feedback so many developers simply assume that because users can't always express themselves accurately that they don't know what it is that they want: communication is tough and not all talented programmers are such talented people persons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658065</id>
	<title>Re:Downside?</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1247254140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They aren't all designed by aeronautical engineers.</p><p>They are designed by a team of aeronautical engineers as well as usability experts, customer service experts and thousands of other people, as well as nearly a century of experience creating aircraft to serve as carriers of people.</p><p>If you left it up to aeronautical engineers alone, we'd all be flying in the belly of aircraft with no seats, no luggage space, no heating or air and about a million other differences that would make the aircraft far more efficient, yet highly unsuitable for you and I to fly on, unless you want require every passenger to wear a flight suit and personal oxygen mask, I don't recommend having aircraft designed exclusively by aeronautical engineers.</p><p>And lets talk about subsystems.  You don't want an aeronautical engineer designing a turbo fan, you want an aeronautical engineer, a materials engineer, someone who knows how to safely design a turbine, someone who can design the turbo fan in such away that when it comes apart for whatever reason that it does so in a non-catastrophic way, such as throwing fan blades through the cabin.  You don't want an aeronautical engineer programming the Flight Management Systems any more than you want an aeronautical engineer writting software for your pace maker.</p><p>Commercial aircraft aren't designed by aeronautical engineers, they are designed by a LOT of engineers of all types.</p><p>Unlike most software, which is written by self proclaimed 'engineers' who really don't have a clue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are n't all designed by aeronautical engineers.They are designed by a team of aeronautical engineers as well as usability experts , customer service experts and thousands of other people , as well as nearly a century of experience creating aircraft to serve as carriers of people.If you left it up to aeronautical engineers alone , we 'd all be flying in the belly of aircraft with no seats , no luggage space , no heating or air and about a million other differences that would make the aircraft far more efficient , yet highly unsuitable for you and I to fly on , unless you want require every passenger to wear a flight suit and personal oxygen mask , I do n't recommend having aircraft designed exclusively by aeronautical engineers.And lets talk about subsystems .
You do n't want an aeronautical engineer designing a turbo fan , you want an aeronautical engineer , a materials engineer , someone who knows how to safely design a turbine , someone who can design the turbo fan in such away that when it comes apart for whatever reason that it does so in a non-catastrophic way , such as throwing fan blades through the cabin .
You do n't want an aeronautical engineer programming the Flight Management Systems any more than you want an aeronautical engineer writting software for your pace maker.Commercial aircraft are n't designed by aeronautical engineers , they are designed by a LOT of engineers of all types.Unlike most software , which is written by self proclaimed 'engineers ' who really do n't have a clue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They aren't all designed by aeronautical engineers.They are designed by a team of aeronautical engineers as well as usability experts, customer service experts and thousands of other people, as well as nearly a century of experience creating aircraft to serve as carriers of people.If you left it up to aeronautical engineers alone, we'd all be flying in the belly of aircraft with no seats, no luggage space, no heating or air and about a million other differences that would make the aircraft far more efficient, yet highly unsuitable for you and I to fly on, unless you want require every passenger to wear a flight suit and personal oxygen mask, I don't recommend having aircraft designed exclusively by aeronautical engineers.And lets talk about subsystems.
You don't want an aeronautical engineer designing a turbo fan, you want an aeronautical engineer, a materials engineer, someone who knows how to safely design a turbine, someone who can design the turbo fan in such away that when it comes apart for whatever reason that it does so in a non-catastrophic way, such as throwing fan blades through the cabin.
You don't want an aeronautical engineer programming the Flight Management Systems any more than you want an aeronautical engineer writting software for your pace maker.Commercial aircraft aren't designed by aeronautical engineers, they are designed by a LOT of engineers of all types.Unlike most software, which is written by self proclaimed 'engineers' who really don't have a clue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653029</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247254260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Put yourself in the place of the average user. You just downloaded an app, played with it for an hour and it wants to upload "one megabyte of 'usage statistics'". What do you do?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Put yourself in the place of the average user .
You just downloaded an app , played with it for an hour and it wants to upload " one megabyte of 'usage statistics ' " .
What do you do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Put yourself in the place of the average user.
You just downloaded an app, played with it for an hour and it wants to upload "one megabyte of 'usage statistics'".
What do you do?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659541</id>
	<title>Re:More whining from fashion designers</title>
	<author>howlingmadhowie</author>
	<datestamp>1247323800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>apple succeeds because of product placement in hollywood.</htmltext>
<tokenext>apple succeeds because of product placement in hollywood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>apple succeeds because of product placement in hollywood.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666951</id>
	<title>Re:Further</title>
	<author>alexandre\_ganso</author>
	<datestamp>1247409060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where in this scheme does the "webcam in gaim/pidgin" fits?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where in this scheme does the " webcam in gaim/pidgin " fits ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where in this scheme does the "webcam in gaim/pidgin" fits?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654523</id>
	<title>Philosophically Different</title>
	<author>deanston</author>
	<datestamp>1247217900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>According to Apple's design guru Jonathan  Ives,  Apple don't do focus groups. Seems to me Apple just do what they (Jobs) think the user want and best damn way possible and let the world judge them. With Apple there is a coherent philosophy to their overall final product. Lumping Open Source all together is your first problem. Just the different Linux distros have different approach and design philosophy to begin with. How do you expect the final "look-and-feel" polish to be the same on all apps and harder still - hardware integration? Say most OS advocates are computer savvy geeks like pro drivers are geeks about race cars. A professional racer's idea of dashboard and controls can be quite different from your average driver on the road. You cannot control a diverse group like the whole OS movement itself. All we can hope is a small group of OS advocates focus on producing a single product that adhere to a single, well-received, consumer user philosophy. One advantage Apple has people always forget too is that they make well designed hardware interface. What users learn to see and touch and they like, they sick with.</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to Apple 's design guru Jonathan Ives , Apple do n't do focus groups .
Seems to me Apple just do what they ( Jobs ) think the user want and best damn way possible and let the world judge them .
With Apple there is a coherent philosophy to their overall final product .
Lumping Open Source all together is your first problem .
Just the different Linux distros have different approach and design philosophy to begin with .
How do you expect the final " look-and-feel " polish to be the same on all apps and harder still - hardware integration ?
Say most OS advocates are computer savvy geeks like pro drivers are geeks about race cars .
A professional racer 's idea of dashboard and controls can be quite different from your average driver on the road .
You can not control a diverse group like the whole OS movement itself .
All we can hope is a small group of OS advocates focus on producing a single product that adhere to a single , well-received , consumer user philosophy .
One advantage Apple has people always forget too is that they make well designed hardware interface .
What users learn to see and touch and they like , they sick with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to Apple's design guru Jonathan  Ives,  Apple don't do focus groups.
Seems to me Apple just do what they (Jobs) think the user want and best damn way possible and let the world judge them.
With Apple there is a coherent philosophy to their overall final product.
Lumping Open Source all together is your first problem.
Just the different Linux distros have different approach and design philosophy to begin with.
How do you expect the final "look-and-feel" polish to be the same on all apps and harder still - hardware integration?
Say most OS advocates are computer savvy geeks like pro drivers are geeks about race cars.
A professional racer's idea of dashboard and controls can be quite different from your average driver on the road.
You cannot control a diverse group like the whole OS movement itself.
All we can hope is a small group of OS advocates focus on producing a single product that adhere to a single, well-received, consumer user philosophy.
One advantage Apple has people always forget too is that they make well designed hardware interface.
What users learn to see and touch and they like, they sick with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658941</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>YourExperiment</author>
	<datestamp>1247314680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does this scare you? Is it not only natural that this is exactly what users should want?</p><p>The developer's job is two-fold: -

</p><ul>
<li>to work out ways of getting as close to that ideal as possible</li><li>to work out the trade-offs between these different feature requests, explain them to the users, and work out the optimum feature set that is actually achievable</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does this scare you ?
Is it not only natural that this is exactly what users should want ? The developer 's job is two-fold : - to work out ways of getting as close to that ideal as possibleto work out the trade-offs between these different feature requests , explain them to the users , and work out the optimum feature set that is actually achievable</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does this scare you?
Is it not only natural that this is exactly what users should want?The developer's job is two-fold: -


to work out ways of getting as close to that ideal as possibleto work out the trade-offs between these different feature requests, explain them to the users, and work out the optimum feature set that is actually achievable</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653027</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28696921</id>
	<title>To everyone that replied to the parent post</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247568840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That post is a "free translation" of a member in the family of posts that are quite often posted at the spanish version of slashdot, "Barrapunto", by some Trolls. They don't care about the content of the post, that's why you've seen nonsense when you read. They just copy-paste the same text again and again, and so on.</p><p>Those post that belong to that family are often titled as "The truth about Milanga", (La verdad de la milanesa)</p><p>A more accurate translation of a typical "The truth about Milanga" would start like...</p><p><em>Although I love Linux and free software a lot, in fact I'm writing this from [Insert Linux distro here] Linux, I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.</em></p><p><em>Nowadays, it doesn't matter if KDE XP or GNOME Millenium are released. When Linux had a chance to earn a place among the desktop market, then it wasted the time and strenth while doing again and again already done jobs. If KDE and Gnome would had work together shoulder to shoulder for giving Linux an unique desktop, surely we'd have a decent GUI. But, instead what we get are two shamed trials of desktops that are useless unless you own 1Gb of RAM and the whole time in the world for setting up the screensaver</em> </p><p>But there are many members in that family, some of then begin like...</p><p>
&nbsp; <em>Although I love Microsoft Windows Vista and privative software a lot, I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.</em></p><p><em>Although I love RIAA and recording companies a lot, I think we everybody must assume the rude reality.</em></p><p><em>Although I love Apple and software for Snobish people a lot, I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.</em></p><p><em>Although I love Rails and its derived languages, I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.</em></p><p><em>Although I love Digg and Social Medias a lot, I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.</em></p><p><em>
&nbsp; </em></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That post is a " free translation " of a member in the family of posts that are quite often posted at the spanish version of slashdot , " Barrapunto " , by some Trolls .
They do n't care about the content of the post , that 's why you 've seen nonsense when you read .
They just copy-paste the same text again and again , and so on.Those post that belong to that family are often titled as " The truth about Milanga " , ( La verdad de la milanesa ) A more accurate translation of a typical " The truth about Milanga " would start like...Although I love Linux and free software a lot , in fact I 'm writing this from [ Insert Linux distro here ] Linux , I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.Nowadays , it does n't matter if KDE XP or GNOME Millenium are released .
When Linux had a chance to earn a place among the desktop market , then it wasted the time and strenth while doing again and again already done jobs .
If KDE and Gnome would had work together shoulder to shoulder for giving Linux an unique desktop , surely we 'd have a decent GUI .
But , instead what we get are two shamed trials of desktops that are useless unless you own 1Gb of RAM and the whole time in the world for setting up the screensaver But there are many members in that family , some of then begin like.. .   Although I love Microsoft Windows Vista and privative software a lot , I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.Although I love RIAA and recording companies a lot , I think we everybody must assume the rude reality.Although I love Apple and software for Snobish people a lot , I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.Although I love Rails and its derived languages , I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.Although I love Digg and Social Medias a lot , I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>That post is a "free translation" of a member in the family of posts that are quite often posted at the spanish version of slashdot, "Barrapunto", by some Trolls.
They don't care about the content of the post, that's why you've seen nonsense when you read.
They just copy-paste the same text again and again, and so on.Those post that belong to that family are often titled as "The truth about Milanga", (La verdad de la milanesa)A more accurate translation of a typical "The truth about Milanga" would start like...Although I love Linux and free software a lot, in fact I'm writing this from [Insert Linux distro here] Linux, I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.Nowadays, it doesn't matter if KDE XP or GNOME Millenium are released.
When Linux had a chance to earn a place among the desktop market, then it wasted the time and strenth while doing again and again already done jobs.
If KDE and Gnome would had work together shoulder to shoulder for giving Linux an unique desktop, surely we'd have a decent GUI.
But, instead what we get are two shamed trials of desktops that are useless unless you own 1Gb of RAM and the whole time in the world for setting up the screensaver But there are many members in that family, some of then begin like...
  Although I love Microsoft Windows Vista and privative software a lot, I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.Although I love RIAA and recording companies a lot, I think we everybody must assume the rude reality.Although I love Apple and software for Snobish people a lot, I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.Although I love Rails and its derived languages, I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.Although I love Digg and Social Medias a lot, I think we everybody must assume the astonishing reality.
  </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654957</id>
	<title>Re:Downside?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247220360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it's like saying: "They've designed the aircraft, why wouldn't they be the best person to check you in, welcome you on board and serve your drinks!?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it 's like saying : " They 've designed the aircraft , why would n't they be the best person to check you in , welcome you on board and serve your drinks ! ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it's like saying: "They've designed the aircraft, why wouldn't they be the best person to check you in, welcome you on board and serve your drinks!?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28676109</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Gilmoure</author>
	<datestamp>1247499240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And here's a prime example of the disconnect between techies and users. A lot of very smart folks don't understand why other folks respond to/interact with the world in a way that is illogical, compared to how the techie views things. Is weird but a lot of tech folks seem to be lacking in empathy. And I don't mean having charitable feelings for others but being able to put themselves in other's shoes and understand or accept different priorities and desires.</p><p>I mean, I totally don't get all the trim options when it comes to cars but I know if I had input on car design, that such things are very important to some folks and should be addressed from the beginning of the project; not as a response to comments/complaints later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And here 's a prime example of the disconnect between techies and users .
A lot of very smart folks do n't understand why other folks respond to/interact with the world in a way that is illogical , compared to how the techie views things .
Is weird but a lot of tech folks seem to be lacking in empathy .
And I do n't mean having charitable feelings for others but being able to put themselves in other 's shoes and understand or accept different priorities and desires.I mean , I totally do n't get all the trim options when it comes to cars but I know if I had input on car design , that such things are very important to some folks and should be addressed from the beginning of the project ; not as a response to comments/complaints later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And here's a prime example of the disconnect between techies and users.
A lot of very smart folks don't understand why other folks respond to/interact with the world in a way that is illogical, compared to how the techie views things.
Is weird but a lot of tech folks seem to be lacking in empathy.
And I don't mean having charitable feelings for others but being able to put themselves in other's shoes and understand or accept different priorities and desires.I mean, I totally don't get all the trim options when it comes to cars but I know if I had input on car design, that such things are very important to some folks and should be addressed from the beginning of the project; not as a response to comments/complaints later.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656915</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>harmonise</author>
	<datestamp>1247236440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If we live in a world where a good image manipulating application is overlooked because its name is GIMP, there is something wrong with the world.</p></div></blockquote><p>You can curse the darkness all you want but that's the way human beings work. Perceptions are important. The word gimp is a pejorative term. The negative aspects of the term are going to be associated with the product which isn't going to make anyone feel good about using it. And for a lot of people, their feelings are important. Some people may be able to look past that and see it as just a good tool, but those people are few and far between.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we live in a world where a good image manipulating application is overlooked because its name is GIMP , there is something wrong with the world.You can curse the darkness all you want but that 's the way human beings work .
Perceptions are important .
The word gimp is a pejorative term .
The negative aspects of the term are going to be associated with the product which is n't going to make anyone feel good about using it .
And for a lot of people , their feelings are important .
Some people may be able to look past that and see it as just a good tool , but those people are few and far between .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we live in a world where a good image manipulating application is overlooked because its name is GIMP, there is something wrong with the world.You can curse the darkness all you want but that's the way human beings work.
Perceptions are important.
The word gimp is a pejorative term.
The negative aspects of the term are going to be associated with the product which isn't going to make anyone feel good about using it.
And for a lot of people, their feelings are important.
Some people may be able to look past that and see it as just a good tool, but those people are few and far between.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653445</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Tom9729</author>
	<datestamp>1247256000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with you that a lot of projects could use better or more descriptive names, but you've gotta realize that 99\% of the time these are people's personal projects that they are either working on because it has some utility to them or because they just want to get experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with you that a lot of projects could use better or more descriptive names , but you 've got ta realize that 99 \ % of the time these are people 's personal projects that they are either working on because it has some utility to them or because they just want to get experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with you that a lot of projects could use better or more descriptive names, but you've gotta realize that 99\% of the time these are people's personal projects that they are either working on because it has some utility to them or because they just want to get experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28657255</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1247240520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>For example, I've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability, but the development team doesn't seem to care.</i></p><p>Open source groups that maintain bug trackers, but completely ignore them-- which is something like 95\% of all open source projects-- are a usability problem.</p><p>If you don't want input, that's fine, but *please* don't pretend like you do. All you're doing is alienating users. I've put in dozens of bug reports, most of which were entirely ignored for years and only closed when the project moved bug tracking software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For example , I 've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability , but the development team does n't seem to care.Open source groups that maintain bug trackers , but completely ignore them-- which is something like 95 \ % of all open source projects-- are a usability problem.If you do n't want input , that 's fine , but * please * do n't pretend like you do .
All you 're doing is alienating users .
I 've put in dozens of bug reports , most of which were entirely ignored for years and only closed when the project moved bug tracking software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For example, I've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability, but the development team doesn't seem to care.Open source groups that maintain bug trackers, but completely ignore them-- which is something like 95\% of all open source projects-- are a usability problem.If you don't want input, that's fine, but *please* don't pretend like you do.
All you're doing is alienating users.
I've put in dozens of bug reports, most of which were entirely ignored for years and only closed when the project moved bug tracking software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653903</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>jank1887</author>
	<datestamp>1247258100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a (self assessed) highly technical individual with programming experience that stops at Matlab algorithms for physical simulation. Well, I've played with C++ once or twice, but I have no notion of software development.  I would love to see an FOSS equivalent to SolidWorks, Pro/Engineer, etc. I use these tools daily. I firmly believe that I could make a contribution to such a product, even if it was just user feedback.</p><p>Also, one of the basic problems with many open source projects is documentation. Some people are quite capable of clicking Help in MS Excel to find something they want to do. Excel has a very thorough help file. Any user could help put a help file together (a wiki doesn't necessarily count).  Pretty graphic design, layout, etc., don't require programming experience ("hey guys, photoshop me what you'd like to see it look like, and I'll try to code it").</p><p>When people (a) know what it is, (b) know how to find it, and (c) don't feel like their sacrificing anything to use it, then people will use your product over something they have to pay for. Time has to be invested in (c), and that's all about the user experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a ( self assessed ) highly technical individual with programming experience that stops at Matlab algorithms for physical simulation .
Well , I 've played with C + + once or twice , but I have no notion of software development .
I would love to see an FOSS equivalent to SolidWorks , Pro/Engineer , etc .
I use these tools daily .
I firmly believe that I could make a contribution to such a product , even if it was just user feedback.Also , one of the basic problems with many open source projects is documentation .
Some people are quite capable of clicking Help in MS Excel to find something they want to do .
Excel has a very thorough help file .
Any user could help put a help file together ( a wiki does n't necessarily count ) .
Pretty graphic design , layout , etc. , do n't require programming experience ( " hey guys , photoshop me what you 'd like to see it look like , and I 'll try to code it " ) .When people ( a ) know what it is , ( b ) know how to find it , and ( c ) do n't feel like their sacrificing anything to use it , then people will use your product over something they have to pay for .
Time has to be invested in ( c ) , and that 's all about the user experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a (self assessed) highly technical individual with programming experience that stops at Matlab algorithms for physical simulation.
Well, I've played with C++ once or twice, but I have no notion of software development.
I would love to see an FOSS equivalent to SolidWorks, Pro/Engineer, etc.
I use these tools daily.
I firmly believe that I could make a contribution to such a product, even if it was just user feedback.Also, one of the basic problems with many open source projects is documentation.
Some people are quite capable of clicking Help in MS Excel to find something they want to do.
Excel has a very thorough help file.
Any user could help put a help file together (a wiki doesn't necessarily count).
Pretty graphic design, layout, etc., don't require programming experience ("hey guys, photoshop me what you'd like to see it look like, and I'll try to code it").When people (a) know what it is, (b) know how to find it, and (c) don't feel like their sacrificing anything to use it, then people will use your product over something they have to pay for.
Time has to be invested in (c), and that's all about the user experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656321</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>geekmansworld</author>
	<datestamp>1247230620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Goodness, what a torrent of replies. Allow me to address some things:</p><p>- Public forums are not a good place to discuss interface design. Why don't open source projects interview people who want to act as "user consultants"?</p><p>- Yes, for-profit software developers don't listen to every single user's suggestion; I can understand how "feature creep" could become a big problem in that regard. However, for-profit has to deliver a decent product with features a majority of its users want. If they don't, they lose business, and profit.</p><p>- A totally immodest comment, but I am not, in fact, the exact type of person you should be catering to? I'm a system administrator mostly, and while I enjoy using Thunderbird at my own workstation, I wouldn't dare give it to my users, because of the bugs and inadequacies. If open source software works and is stable, I can push to have it deployed at our entire organization, and translate users' concerns into concise and coherent input. Doesn't that sound nice?</p><p>Please don't belittle me. Software is made for users, not developers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Goodness , what a torrent of replies .
Allow me to address some things : - Public forums are not a good place to discuss interface design .
Why do n't open source projects interview people who want to act as " user consultants " ? - Yes , for-profit software developers do n't listen to every single user 's suggestion ; I can understand how " feature creep " could become a big problem in that regard .
However , for-profit has to deliver a decent product with features a majority of its users want .
If they do n't , they lose business , and profit.- A totally immodest comment , but I am not , in fact , the exact type of person you should be catering to ?
I 'm a system administrator mostly , and while I enjoy using Thunderbird at my own workstation , I would n't dare give it to my users , because of the bugs and inadequacies .
If open source software works and is stable , I can push to have it deployed at our entire organization , and translate users ' concerns into concise and coherent input .
Does n't that sound nice ? Please do n't belittle me .
Software is made for users , not developers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Goodness, what a torrent of replies.
Allow me to address some things:- Public forums are not a good place to discuss interface design.
Why don't open source projects interview people who want to act as "user consultants"?- Yes, for-profit software developers don't listen to every single user's suggestion; I can understand how "feature creep" could become a big problem in that regard.
However, for-profit has to deliver a decent product with features a majority of its users want.
If they don't, they lose business, and profit.- A totally immodest comment, but I am not, in fact, the exact type of person you should be catering to?
I'm a system administrator mostly, and while I enjoy using Thunderbird at my own workstation, I wouldn't dare give it to my users, because of the bugs and inadequacies.
If open source software works and is stable, I can push to have it deployed at our entire organization, and translate users' concerns into concise and coherent input.
Doesn't that sound nice?Please don't belittle me.
Software is made for users, not developers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653347</id>
	<title>False start</title>
	<author>scorp1us</author>
	<datestamp>1247255700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The day that I, as a nontechnical software user, can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won.</i></p><p>Show me an instance of this with Apple. In fact, I would argue the opposite - that their strict control of the platform has allowed them to focus on only approving software that specifically fits the customer's needs the best. As apposed to the open source model which is one tool, a million uses. With apple you get the universal 1-piece screw driver. With open source you get the Craftsmen all-in-one screw driver with 36 bits and 6 handles in 4 colors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The day that I , as a nontechnical software user , can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won.Show me an instance of this with Apple .
In fact , I would argue the opposite - that their strict control of the platform has allowed them to focus on only approving software that specifically fits the customer 's needs the best .
As apposed to the open source model which is one tool , a million uses .
With apple you get the universal 1-piece screw driver .
With open source you get the Craftsmen all-in-one screw driver with 36 bits and 6 handles in 4 colors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The day that I, as a nontechnical software user, can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won.Show me an instance of this with Apple.
In fact, I would argue the opposite - that their strict control of the platform has allowed them to focus on only approving software that specifically fits the customer's needs the best.
As apposed to the open source model which is one tool, a million uses.
With apple you get the universal 1-piece screw driver.
With open source you get the Craftsmen all-in-one screw driver with 36 bits and 6 handles in 4 colors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653729</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>trvd1707</author>
	<datestamp>1247257140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even if this user analytics is able to capture the whole echosystem of the machine running the program, it would have to be able to capture things that are happening outside the computer reach. Sometimes the user executes several tasks outside the program to find out what they want to do with the program. There are written notes on the side of the machine, questions shouted to someone on the other desk,  phone calls, that might be fulfilling things that the program is failing in provide.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if this user analytics is able to capture the whole echosystem of the machine running the program , it would have to be able to capture things that are happening outside the computer reach .
Sometimes the user executes several tasks outside the program to find out what they want to do with the program .
There are written notes on the side of the machine , questions shouted to someone on the other desk , phone calls , that might be fulfilling things that the program is failing in provide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if this user analytics is able to capture the whole echosystem of the machine running the program, it would have to be able to capture things that are happening outside the computer reach.
Sometimes the user executes several tasks outside the program to find out what they want to do with the program.
There are written notes on the side of the machine, questions shouted to someone on the other desk,  phone calls, that might be fulfilling things that the program is failing in provide.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654465</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Feyshtey</author>
	<datestamp>1247217540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... it could generate data on how the average user goes about finding a particular setting, how long it takes them to perform a given action, etc.</p></div><p>How do you catalog how long it takes a user to do something without a definitive start of the clock? Does the user click on the "I'm going to clear my browser cache" button before going to perform the action so that it can be timed?

<br> <br>

I suppose you could start the clock when the user first began going through the file menus. But that assumes that they completed their time in the menus by doing what they actually intended to do. As you pointed out, users are clueless.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... it could generate data on how the average user goes about finding a particular setting , how long it takes them to perform a given action , etc.How do you catalog how long it takes a user to do something without a definitive start of the clock ?
Does the user click on the " I 'm going to clear my browser cache " button before going to perform the action so that it can be timed ?
I suppose you could start the clock when the user first began going through the file menus .
But that assumes that they completed their time in the menus by doing what they actually intended to do .
As you pointed out , users are clueless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... it could generate data on how the average user goes about finding a particular setting, how long it takes them to perform a given action, etc.How do you catalog how long it takes a user to do something without a definitive start of the clock?
Does the user click on the "I'm going to clear my browser cache" button before going to perform the action so that it can be timed?
I suppose you could start the clock when the user first began going through the file menus.
But that assumes that they completed their time in the menus by doing what they actually intended to do.
As you pointed out, users are clueless.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658875</id>
	<title>Re:That a single cohesive vision...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247312760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> &gt; One day it will happen, or Google/Ubuntu will do it first.<br>And Google/Ubuntu doing it doesn't result in it happening... how?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; One day it will happen , or Google/Ubuntu will do it first.And Google/Ubuntu doing it does n't result in it happening... how ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> &gt; One day it will happen, or Google/Ubuntu will do it first.And Google/Ubuntu doing it doesn't result in it happening... how?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653209</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28657981</id>
	<title>develop for gnustep</title>
	<author>smash</author>
	<datestamp>1247252760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Why people are wanking about with KDE and Gnome when there is a perfectly usable environment with various libraries common to MacOS X puzzles me.
</p><p>
Sure, the work done on KDE and gnome is nice, but it still a FAR way off what NextSTEP had in 1991.  Pretty up the front end of GNUStep, and you'll have something akin to OS/X / Cocoa, with a fairly high level of source and development methodology compatibility.
</p><p>
I guess the lesson "open source" could "learn" is to stop reinventing the wheel, when that problem was solved many many years ago, and concentrate on moving FORWARDS to newer and more ambitious goals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why people are wanking about with KDE and Gnome when there is a perfectly usable environment with various libraries common to MacOS X puzzles me .
Sure , the work done on KDE and gnome is nice , but it still a FAR way off what NextSTEP had in 1991 .
Pretty up the front end of GNUStep , and you 'll have something akin to OS/X / Cocoa , with a fairly high level of source and development methodology compatibility .
I guess the lesson " open source " could " learn " is to stop reinventing the wheel , when that problem was solved many many years ago , and concentrate on moving FORWARDS to newer and more ambitious goals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Why people are wanking about with KDE and Gnome when there is a perfectly usable environment with various libraries common to MacOS X puzzles me.
Sure, the work done on KDE and gnome is nice, but it still a FAR way off what NextSTEP had in 1991.
Pretty up the front end of GNUStep, and you'll have something akin to OS/X / Cocoa, with a fairly high level of source and development methodology compatibility.
I guess the lesson "open source" could "learn" is to stop reinventing the wheel, when that problem was solved many many years ago, and concentrate on moving FORWARDS to newer and more ambitious goals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654867</id>
	<title>Open-Source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247219820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When are you dirty hippies going to learn that we live in a capitalist society, and Open-Source is never going to happen.  Maybe for the home user that can get sold on a gimmick.  Case study ya'll, Microsoft came out when the Internet was booming.  There was a necessity there for people to get with the MS program, and Linux sat on the bench, or did not make it easy.  Wake up people we are in the middle of a recession.  Spin your Star Trek dirty little hippy wheels all day, or get out there and bring our economy back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When are you dirty hippies going to learn that we live in a capitalist society , and Open-Source is never going to happen .
Maybe for the home user that can get sold on a gimmick .
Case study ya 'll , Microsoft came out when the Internet was booming .
There was a necessity there for people to get with the MS program , and Linux sat on the bench , or did not make it easy .
Wake up people we are in the middle of a recession .
Spin your Star Trek dirty little hippy wheels all day , or get out there and bring our economy back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When are you dirty hippies going to learn that we live in a capitalist society, and Open-Source is never going to happen.
Maybe for the home user that can get sold on a gimmick.
Case study ya'll, Microsoft came out when the Internet was booming.
There was a necessity there for people to get with the MS program, and Linux sat on the bench, or did not make it easy.
Wake up people we are in the middle of a recession.
Spin your Star Trek dirty little hippy wheels all day, or get out there and bring our economy back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656175</id>
	<title>Yep, that and more.</title>
	<author>Weedhopper</author>
	<datestamp>1247229540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I am paying some dude to write a custom solution for me, he damn well better listen to what I have to say.  If not, then we have a problem and I can find someone else.  Usually, I can.</p><p>That's commercial software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I am paying some dude to write a custom solution for me , he damn well better listen to what I have to say .
If not , then we have a problem and I can find someone else .
Usually , I can.That 's commercial software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I am paying some dude to write a custom solution for me, he damn well better listen to what I have to say.
If not, then we have a problem and I can find someone else.
Usually, I can.That's commercial software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>migla</author>
	<datestamp>1247224260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's probably true that FOSS could use marketing. It's sad that the world is in such a state that you need to bullshit (as in lure with buzzwords/shinyness and appeal to emotion and such tricks). Maybe you sometimes do need to play the game.</p><p>For example: Amnesty International does ads and they can help lots more people because of the extra donations an ad campaign results in.</p><p>What I'd really feel like saying is a bit different, though:</p><p>If we live in a world where a good image manipulating application is overlooked because its name is GIMP, there is something wrong with the world. If "brand" is more important than functionality, this world needs less marketing, not more.</p><p>Fuck marketing! Just give people the free and open truth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's probably true that FOSS could use marketing .
It 's sad that the world is in such a state that you need to bullshit ( as in lure with buzzwords/shinyness and appeal to emotion and such tricks ) .
Maybe you sometimes do need to play the game.For example : Amnesty International does ads and they can help lots more people because of the extra donations an ad campaign results in.What I 'd really feel like saying is a bit different , though : If we live in a world where a good image manipulating application is overlooked because its name is GIMP , there is something wrong with the world .
If " brand " is more important than functionality , this world needs less marketing , not more.Fuck marketing !
Just give people the free and open truth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's probably true that FOSS could use marketing.
It's sad that the world is in such a state that you need to bullshit (as in lure with buzzwords/shinyness and appeal to emotion and such tricks).
Maybe you sometimes do need to play the game.For example: Amnesty International does ads and they can help lots more people because of the extra donations an ad campaign results in.What I'd really feel like saying is a bit different, though:If we live in a world where a good image manipulating application is overlooked because its name is GIMP, there is something wrong with the world.
If "brand" is more important than functionality, this world needs less marketing, not more.Fuck marketing!
Just give people the free and open truth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653649</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>imhennessy</author>
	<datestamp>1247256780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What are the obstacles to building in a simple tracking system to more applications?  I routinely check to box, even for Microsoft products, that provides feedback about crashes, or which packages are most popular, or what ever usage statistics developers are collecting.</p><p>I guess it would have to:</p><p>be opt-in.<br>clearly, and demonstrably NOT collect personally identifying info.<br>have very little impact on resources and performance.<br>collect the right info.</p><p>I'm sure there's a lot of stuff I'm missing, and I really have no idea how to deliver any of it; all the same, it seems like something that would be quite beneficial, and easy to present as such.</p><p>ivan</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What are the obstacles to building in a simple tracking system to more applications ?
I routinely check to box , even for Microsoft products , that provides feedback about crashes , or which packages are most popular , or what ever usage statistics developers are collecting.I guess it would have to : be opt-in.clearly , and demonstrably NOT collect personally identifying info.have very little impact on resources and performance.collect the right info.I 'm sure there 's a lot of stuff I 'm missing , and I really have no idea how to deliver any of it ; all the same , it seems like something that would be quite beneficial , and easy to present as such.ivan</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are the obstacles to building in a simple tracking system to more applications?
I routinely check to box, even for Microsoft products, that provides feedback about crashes, or which packages are most popular, or what ever usage statistics developers are collecting.I guess it would have to:be opt-in.clearly, and demonstrably NOT collect personally identifying info.have very little impact on resources and performance.collect the right info.I'm sure there's a lot of stuff I'm missing, and I really have no idea how to deliver any of it; all the same, it seems like something that would be quite beneficial, and easy to present as such.ivan</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653813</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>nobodylocalhost</author>
	<datestamp>1247257620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd toss some lighter fluids on firefox and kick it out of the window if it forces user analytics. No, just no. Why do you think so many people don't use Chrome? It's because of annoying and stupid harebrained ideas like this that we can't have nice things. The funniest part about this is YOU, AS A USER, ARE SAYING YOU ARE CLUELESS ABOUT WHAT YOU REALLY WANT YOURSELF! This is a big (not funny) joke. A browser is the kind of software that everybody uses, including programmers, designers, artists, architects, engineers. How dare you generalize your user base in such manner. It's incredibly simple to figure out what the users want. All you need to do is but ask. That is what Apple does. They design something, and ask the users if they like it or not. DONE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd toss some lighter fluids on firefox and kick it out of the window if it forces user analytics .
No , just no .
Why do you think so many people do n't use Chrome ?
It 's because of annoying and stupid harebrained ideas like this that we ca n't have nice things .
The funniest part about this is YOU , AS A USER , ARE SAYING YOU ARE CLUELESS ABOUT WHAT YOU REALLY WANT YOURSELF !
This is a big ( not funny ) joke .
A browser is the kind of software that everybody uses , including programmers , designers , artists , architects , engineers .
How dare you generalize your user base in such manner .
It 's incredibly simple to figure out what the users want .
All you need to do is but ask .
That is what Apple does .
They design something , and ask the users if they like it or not .
DONE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd toss some lighter fluids on firefox and kick it out of the window if it forces user analytics.
No, just no.
Why do you think so many people don't use Chrome?
It's because of annoying and stupid harebrained ideas like this that we can't have nice things.
The funniest part about this is YOU, AS A USER, ARE SAYING YOU ARE CLUELESS ABOUT WHAT YOU REALLY WANT YOURSELF!
This is a big (not funny) joke.
A browser is the kind of software that everybody uses, including programmers, designers, artists, architects, engineers.
How dare you generalize your user base in such manner.
It's incredibly simple to figure out what the users want.
All you need to do is but ask.
That is what Apple does.
They design something, and ask the users if they like it or not.
DONE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658063</id>
	<title>It can't learn ANYTHING</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247254080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux is NOT Microsoft Windows and it is NOT Apples OSX and it is NOT HP-UX or anything else.</p><p>The strength of linux (and with this I mean the whole opensource enviroment that you can find on a ubuntu CD) is that it is its own thing.</p><p>You have Ford and it produces cars that appeal to some people. You have Ferrari and those cars to appeal to some. But you also got people who build their own cars (possibly from kits) and that is a market too.</p><p>It would be absolutely silly to ask a kit-car to have the same build qualities as a porche or the same features as a mercedes.</p><p>The people who want linux to learn from either apple or MS are the same who would put a radio in a ferrari or an airbag on a buggati. Or for that matter require that a dune buggy has an airco.</p><p>Linux is what it is because it is what it is. That includes a thousand techies "designing" software to their own tastes. If you happen to like their taste, you are in luck. If you don't... well then you either become a techie or pay someone to be a techie for you OR buy Apple/MS.</p><p>What always amazes me in these type of stories is that non-linux users seems to thinkthey can demand unpaid linux developers to dance to their tunes, yet happily pay both MS and Apple to NOT listen to them. I told apple not to go to Intel and did they listen? I told MS to not do Vista DRM and did they listen?</p><p>Before you try to tell linux developers how to their their hobby, try telling the people you actually PAY how to do theirs. Get safari the way you want it if you want to bitch about the mozilla team not listening.</p><p>For that matter, if you want linux to listen to customers, then you need to talk to RedHat or Ubuntu or whatever. They are the ones who have customers. Linux does NOT have customers. It has developers and users. If the user does not like what the developer does he first has to become a customer. Good luck with that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux is NOT Microsoft Windows and it is NOT Apples OSX and it is NOT HP-UX or anything else.The strength of linux ( and with this I mean the whole opensource enviroment that you can find on a ubuntu CD ) is that it is its own thing.You have Ford and it produces cars that appeal to some people .
You have Ferrari and those cars to appeal to some .
But you also got people who build their own cars ( possibly from kits ) and that is a market too.It would be absolutely silly to ask a kit-car to have the same build qualities as a porche or the same features as a mercedes.The people who want linux to learn from either apple or MS are the same who would put a radio in a ferrari or an airbag on a buggati .
Or for that matter require that a dune buggy has an airco.Linux is what it is because it is what it is .
That includes a thousand techies " designing " software to their own tastes .
If you happen to like their taste , you are in luck .
If you do n't... well then you either become a techie or pay someone to be a techie for you OR buy Apple/MS.What always amazes me in these type of stories is that non-linux users seems to thinkthey can demand unpaid linux developers to dance to their tunes , yet happily pay both MS and Apple to NOT listen to them .
I told apple not to go to Intel and did they listen ?
I told MS to not do Vista DRM and did they listen ? Before you try to tell linux developers how to their their hobby , try telling the people you actually PAY how to do theirs .
Get safari the way you want it if you want to bitch about the mozilla team not listening.For that matter , if you want linux to listen to customers , then you need to talk to RedHat or Ubuntu or whatever .
They are the ones who have customers .
Linux does NOT have customers .
It has developers and users .
If the user does not like what the developer does he first has to become a customer .
Good luck with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux is NOT Microsoft Windows and it is NOT Apples OSX and it is NOT HP-UX or anything else.The strength of linux (and with this I mean the whole opensource enviroment that you can find on a ubuntu CD) is that it is its own thing.You have Ford and it produces cars that appeal to some people.
You have Ferrari and those cars to appeal to some.
But you also got people who build their own cars (possibly from kits) and that is a market too.It would be absolutely silly to ask a kit-car to have the same build qualities as a porche or the same features as a mercedes.The people who want linux to learn from either apple or MS are the same who would put a radio in a ferrari or an airbag on a buggati.
Or for that matter require that a dune buggy has an airco.Linux is what it is because it is what it is.
That includes a thousand techies "designing" software to their own tastes.
If you happen to like their taste, you are in luck.
If you don't... well then you either become a techie or pay someone to be a techie for you OR buy Apple/MS.What always amazes me in these type of stories is that non-linux users seems to thinkthey can demand unpaid linux developers to dance to their tunes, yet happily pay both MS and Apple to NOT listen to them.
I told apple not to go to Intel and did they listen?
I told MS to not do Vista DRM and did they listen?Before you try to tell linux developers how to their their hobby, try telling the people you actually PAY how to do theirs.
Get safari the way you want it if you want to bitch about the mozilla team not listening.For that matter, if you want linux to listen to customers, then you need to talk to RedHat or Ubuntu or whatever.
They are the ones who have customers.
Linux does NOT have customers.
It has developers and users.
If the user does not like what the developer does he first has to become a customer.
Good luck with that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653295</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Estanislao Martínez</author>
	<datestamp>1247255460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I agree with the article that user involvement is key. However, users are clueless about what they really want and you can't possibly use them to write the specs of your product! On the other hand, developers tend to reject criticism from end-users because they lack technical expertise.</p></div></blockquote><p>I get the impression you didn't understand the article then, because quite early on they approvingly cite this (which they attribute to Jason Snell of MacWorld):</p><blockquote><div><p>"Apple excels at creating products that the general public likes because the company is driven by <b>design</b>, not by engineering." [my emphasis]</p></div></blockquote><p>They're not simply asking users what they want and then just doing what the users say; that would indeed be a recipe for disaster.  They have design people in charge of figuring out what the products should be, validating proposed designs against user focus groups, sitting end-users down for experiments to see how usable something is, discovering usability problems with existing products, etc.  And then they use this sort of information to decide what to build.</p><blockquote><div><p>I can think of one approach that might work: build a really good analytics library that would measure various usability aspects.</p></div></blockquote><p>Won't work.  You need to know what the user is trying to do to interpret the data, and the software can't read the user's mind.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with the article that user involvement is key .
However , users are clueless about what they really want and you ca n't possibly use them to write the specs of your product !
On the other hand , developers tend to reject criticism from end-users because they lack technical expertise.I get the impression you did n't understand the article then , because quite early on they approvingly cite this ( which they attribute to Jason Snell of MacWorld ) : " Apple excels at creating products that the general public likes because the company is driven by design , not by engineering .
" [ my emphasis ] They 're not simply asking users what they want and then just doing what the users say ; that would indeed be a recipe for disaster .
They have design people in charge of figuring out what the products should be , validating proposed designs against user focus groups , sitting end-users down for experiments to see how usable something is , discovering usability problems with existing products , etc .
And then they use this sort of information to decide what to build.I can think of one approach that might work : build a really good analytics library that would measure various usability aspects.Wo n't work .
You need to know what the user is trying to do to interpret the data , and the software ca n't read the user 's mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with the article that user involvement is key.
However, users are clueless about what they really want and you can't possibly use them to write the specs of your product!
On the other hand, developers tend to reject criticism from end-users because they lack technical expertise.I get the impression you didn't understand the article then, because quite early on they approvingly cite this (which they attribute to Jason Snell of MacWorld):"Apple excels at creating products that the general public likes because the company is driven by design, not by engineering.
" [my emphasis]They're not simply asking users what they want and then just doing what the users say; that would indeed be a recipe for disaster.
They have design people in charge of figuring out what the products should be, validating proposed designs against user focus groups, sitting end-users down for experiments to see how usable something is, discovering usability problems with existing products, etc.
And then they use this sort of information to decide what to build.I can think of one approach that might work: build a really good analytics library that would measure various usability aspects.Won't work.
You need to know what the user is trying to do to interpret the data, and the software can't read the user's mind.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658273</id>
	<title>Brevity</title>
	<author>AlexanderTe</author>
	<datestamp>1247344020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am working on an UI right now that is inspired by Apple, and yes--it's based on Linux.<br>
<br>
The long term goal is to put together an operating system. The short term goal is to create a intuitive, zooming user interace.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://brevityos.blogspot.com/" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://brevityos.blogspot.com/</a> [blogspot.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am working on an UI right now that is inspired by Apple , and yes--it 's based on Linux .
The long term goal is to put together an operating system .
The short term goal is to create a intuitive , zooming user interace .
http : //brevityos.blogspot.com/ [ blogspot.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am working on an UI right now that is inspired by Apple, and yes--it's based on Linux.
The long term goal is to put together an operating system.
The short term goal is to create a intuitive, zooming user interace.
http://brevityos.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653027</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1247254260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> users are clueless about what they really want</p></div><p>They know what they want. Ask them what they want in a car and they'll say an SUV with room for 8, at least 50 MPG, all the latest gadgets and costs less than $12,000. If you can't provide that then it's your fault.<br> <br>

I mean this for humor's sake but thinking about it I'm scared that it might be an accurate description.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>users are clueless about what they really wantThey know what they want .
Ask them what they want in a car and they 'll say an SUV with room for 8 , at least 50 MPG , all the latest gadgets and costs less than $ 12,000 .
If you ca n't provide that then it 's your fault .
I mean this for humor 's sake but thinking about it I 'm scared that it might be an accurate description .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> users are clueless about what they really wantThey know what they want.
Ask them what they want in a car and they'll say an SUV with room for 8, at least 50 MPG, all the latest gadgets and costs less than $12,000.
If you can't provide that then it's your fault.
I mean this for humor's sake but thinking about it I'm scared that it might be an accurate description.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655315</id>
	<title>The Truth About Commercial vs. Open Source</title>
	<author>tlambert</author>
	<datestamp>1247222820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Truth About Commercial vs. Open Source<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...is that in a commercial setting, there is dictatorial editorial control, and people are willing to work on things they wouldn't ordinarily work on for the joy of it, in trade for money.</p><p>Without that, there's no way to prioritize customer input ahead of developer desires, and there's no way to get a developer to work on something that they disagree with.</p><p>The closest the Open Source community has come to this are companies like Mozilla, RedHat, and Ubuntu, which are large participants in particular Open Source projects, but which internally exercise a single editorial philosophy over the product, and have paid engineers to work on the things that no one would work on at all, if it weren't for the money.</p><p>I have absolutely no idea (and I expect no one else does, either) how you would cause a bug report to be responded to in a timely fashion and get it resolved to the satisfaction of the person who filed it, in an Open Source project, unless the person who filed it wrote the fix, and the fix was acceptable to the some pigs who were more equal than others in the project.  Most large changes to Open Source projects are arbitrated by a board of people who are self-selecting, who are there because of seniority, or nepotism, or as a result of a popularity contest.  From such groups, you're going to get consensus.   Anything that goes against that is going to get strong resistance, even if the consensus is basically what Frank Herbert called a "demopoll", which means you will always end up with the lowest common denominator.</p><p>Great products (and terrible ones) require an 800 pound gorilla to force its views on the participants, and for those participants to be willing to stick around despite the force.</p><p>-- Terry</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Truth About Commercial vs. Open Source ...is that in a commercial setting , there is dictatorial editorial control , and people are willing to work on things they would n't ordinarily work on for the joy of it , in trade for money.Without that , there 's no way to prioritize customer input ahead of developer desires , and there 's no way to get a developer to work on something that they disagree with.The closest the Open Source community has come to this are companies like Mozilla , RedHat , and Ubuntu , which are large participants in particular Open Source projects , but which internally exercise a single editorial philosophy over the product , and have paid engineers to work on the things that no one would work on at all , if it were n't for the money.I have absolutely no idea ( and I expect no one else does , either ) how you would cause a bug report to be responded to in a timely fashion and get it resolved to the satisfaction of the person who filed it , in an Open Source project , unless the person who filed it wrote the fix , and the fix was acceptable to the some pigs who were more equal than others in the project .
Most large changes to Open Source projects are arbitrated by a board of people who are self-selecting , who are there because of seniority , or nepotism , or as a result of a popularity contest .
From such groups , you 're going to get consensus .
Anything that goes against that is going to get strong resistance , even if the consensus is basically what Frank Herbert called a " demopoll " , which means you will always end up with the lowest common denominator.Great products ( and terrible ones ) require an 800 pound gorilla to force its views on the participants , and for those participants to be willing to stick around despite the force.-- Terry</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Truth About Commercial vs. Open Source ...is that in a commercial setting, there is dictatorial editorial control, and people are willing to work on things they wouldn't ordinarily work on for the joy of it, in trade for money.Without that, there's no way to prioritize customer input ahead of developer desires, and there's no way to get a developer to work on something that they disagree with.The closest the Open Source community has come to this are companies like Mozilla, RedHat, and Ubuntu, which are large participants in particular Open Source projects, but which internally exercise a single editorial philosophy over the product, and have paid engineers to work on the things that no one would work on at all, if it weren't for the money.I have absolutely no idea (and I expect no one else does, either) how you would cause a bug report to be responded to in a timely fashion and get it resolved to the satisfaction of the person who filed it, in an Open Source project, unless the person who filed it wrote the fix, and the fix was acceptable to the some pigs who were more equal than others in the project.
Most large changes to Open Source projects are arbitrated by a board of people who are self-selecting, who are there because of seniority, or nepotism, or as a result of a popularity contest.
From such groups, you're going to get consensus.
Anything that goes against that is going to get strong resistance, even if the consensus is basically what Frank Herbert called a "demopoll", which means you will always end up with the lowest common denominator.Great products (and terrible ones) require an 800 pound gorilla to force its views on the participants, and for those participants to be willing to stick around despite the force.-- Terry</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28664539</id>
	<title>Re:More whining from fashion designers</title>
	<author>SoupIsGoodFood\_42</author>
	<datestamp>1247319060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple does succeed because of design. Design does not just mean making something look pretty. The aesthetics of Apple's products is a reflection of their design effort -- It's a natural consequence of a good design process.</p><p>Bad websites can also be built by competent coders who don't use overuse JavaScript, too. If you think that the success of a website is based on code alone, then no wonder you have such strange views about design. BTW, if you look at Apple's website, they do actually use a lot of JavaScript for UI widgets.</p><p>You know what BS I'm sick of? People who think that design is purely aesthetical and that designers don't understand technical things. I spend a lot of time doing graphic art, but I've also just installed FreeBSD on a Mac mini. Now, perhaps that isn't the norm, but I'm far from the only person who understands both these areas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple does succeed because of design .
Design does not just mean making something look pretty .
The aesthetics of Apple 's products is a reflection of their design effort -- It 's a natural consequence of a good design process.Bad websites can also be built by competent coders who do n't use overuse JavaScript , too .
If you think that the success of a website is based on code alone , then no wonder you have such strange views about design .
BTW , if you look at Apple 's website , they do actually use a lot of JavaScript for UI widgets.You know what BS I 'm sick of ?
People who think that design is purely aesthetical and that designers do n't understand technical things .
I spend a lot of time doing graphic art , but I 've also just installed FreeBSD on a Mac mini .
Now , perhaps that is n't the norm , but I 'm far from the only person who understands both these areas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple does succeed because of design.
Design does not just mean making something look pretty.
The aesthetics of Apple's products is a reflection of their design effort -- It's a natural consequence of a good design process.Bad websites can also be built by competent coders who don't use overuse JavaScript, too.
If you think that the success of a website is based on code alone, then no wonder you have such strange views about design.
BTW, if you look at Apple's website, they do actually use a lot of JavaScript for UI widgets.You know what BS I'm sick of?
People who think that design is purely aesthetical and that designers don't understand technical things.
I spend a lot of time doing graphic art, but I've also just installed FreeBSD on a Mac mini.
Now, perhaps that isn't the norm, but I'm far from the only person who understands both these areas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125</id>
	<title>It's about marketing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247254740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What keeps Apple and Microsoft on top is marketing and momentum. We live in a society driven by mass media. For the most part open-source does not have a sufficient marketing budget. Most people do not even know about alternatives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What keeps Apple and Microsoft on top is marketing and momentum .
We live in a society driven by mass media .
For the most part open-source does not have a sufficient marketing budget .
Most people do not even know about alternatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What keeps Apple and Microsoft on top is marketing and momentum.
We live in a society driven by mass media.
For the most part open-source does not have a sufficient marketing budget.
Most people do not even know about alternatives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655465</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247223960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the immortal words of Bill Hicks, "if you're in marketing or advertising, kill yourself."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the immortal words of Bill Hicks , " if you 're in marketing or advertising , kill yourself .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the immortal words of Bill Hicks, "if you're in marketing or advertising, kill yourself.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28657973</id>
	<title>Usability tip for FOSS</title>
	<author>jawahar</author>
	<datestamp>1247252340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Usability is inversely proportional to the number of mouse clicks for the user desired feature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Usability is inversely proportional to the number of mouse clicks for the user desired feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Usability is inversely proportional to the number of mouse clicks for the user desired feature.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139</id>
	<title>Downside?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247254800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>"The downside is that these contributors are techies..."<br> <br>That's like saying the drawback to commercial aircraft is that they are designed by aeronautical engineers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The downside is that these contributors are techies... " That 's like saying the drawback to commercial aircraft is that they are designed by aeronautical engineers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The downside is that these contributors are techies..." That's like saying the drawback to commercial aircraft is that they are designed by aeronautical engineers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654959</id>
	<title>nothing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247220360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>haha, nothing, open source doesn&#194;t need to learn something from Apple, this is one caprice of a bunch of apple fanboys, keep dreaming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>haha , nothing , open source doesn   t need to learn something from Apple , this is one caprice of a bunch of apple fanboys , keep dreaming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>haha, nothing, open source doesnÂt need to learn something from Apple, this is one caprice of a bunch of apple fanboys, keep dreaming.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654945</id>
	<title>Re:One word</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247220300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you inherit your offensive ignorance or develop it through your wasted freedom of choice?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you inherit your offensive ignorance or develop it through your wasted freedom of choice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you inherit your offensive ignorance or develop it through your wasted freedom of choice?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653241</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653797</id>
	<title>Help desk</title>
	<author>Geoffrey.landis</author>
	<datestamp>1247257500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My proposed solution is to make it a rule that all software developers should be required to serve at least one day a week on the help desk.
</p><p>As far as I can tell, developers-- at least the Microsoft developers, anyway-- really, honestly don't <i>know</i> why ordinary users find their products frustrating and hard to use; while the help-desk people <i>do</i> know what the problems are, but are considered to be so low on the totem pole that nobody would ever think of asking <i>their</i> opinions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My proposed solution is to make it a rule that all software developers should be required to serve at least one day a week on the help desk .
As far as I can tell , developers-- at least the Microsoft developers , anyway-- really , honestly do n't know why ordinary users find their products frustrating and hard to use ; while the help-desk people do know what the problems are , but are considered to be so low on the totem pole that nobody would ever think of asking their opinions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My proposed solution is to make it a rule that all software developers should be required to serve at least one day a week on the help desk.
As far as I can tell, developers-- at least the Microsoft developers, anyway-- really, honestly don't know why ordinary users find their products frustrating and hard to use; while the help-desk people do know what the problems are, but are considered to be so low on the totem pole that nobody would ever think of asking their opinions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653605</id>
	<title>Re:Downside?</title>
	<author>Aggrav8d</author>
	<datestamp>1247256660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That's like saying the drawback to commercial aircraft is that they are designed by aeronautical engineers.</p></div><p>
You don't fly much, do you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's like saying the drawback to commercial aircraft is that they are designed by aeronautical engineers .
You do n't fly much , do you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's like saying the drawback to commercial aircraft is that they are designed by aeronautical engineers.
You don't fly much, do you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28664591</id>
	<title>Re:It's about marketing</title>
	<author>SoupIsGoodFood\_42</author>
	<datestamp>1247319720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's more than just marketing. Marketing is important, but you also need to make a good product (or have a monopoly). Sony spend a lot on marketing, but they haven't been successful with their iPod-competitors. Same goes for Microsoft and the Zune.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's more than just marketing .
Marketing is important , but you also need to make a good product ( or have a monopoly ) .
Sony spend a lot on marketing , but they have n't been successful with their iPod-competitors .
Same goes for Microsoft and the Zune .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's more than just marketing.
Marketing is important, but you also need to make a good product (or have a monopoly).
Sony spend a lot on marketing, but they haven't been successful with their iPod-competitors.
Same goes for Microsoft and the Zune.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665259</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Risen888</author>
	<datestamp>1247331540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Close. To open source developers you are either (a) The developer himself, or (b) Not the developer himself. If (b) then the excuse is either (i) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself, or (ii) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input.</p></div><p>[citation needed]</p><p>Seriously. I'd like to argue with you here, but you're not even giving me anything to argue with. How about an example or something?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Close .
To open source developers you are either ( a ) The developer himself , or ( b ) Not the developer himself .
If ( b ) then the excuse is either ( i ) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself , or ( ii ) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input .
[ citation needed ] Seriously .
I 'd like to argue with you here , but you 're not even giving me anything to argue with .
How about an example or something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Close.
To open source developers you are either (a) The developer himself, or (b) Not the developer himself.
If (b) then the excuse is either (i) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself, or (ii) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input.
[citation needed]Seriously.
I'd like to argue with you here, but you're not even giving me anything to argue with.
How about an example or something?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653773</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247257440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design. But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life. Does this make my input useless?</p></div></blockquote><p>
I don't mean to appear rude, but just because you consider yourself a "connoisseur of good interface design" doesn't necessary mean you can make a good interface.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm an IT professional , a power user , and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design .
But I 've never coded a line of C + + in my entire life .
Does this make my input useless ?
I do n't mean to appear rude , but just because you consider yourself a " connoisseur of good interface design " does n't necessary mean you can make a good interface .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design.
But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life.
Does this make my input useless?
I don't mean to appear rude, but just because you consider yourself a "connoisseur of good interface design" doesn't necessary mean you can make a good interface.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665587</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1247337300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Close. To open source developers you are either (a) The developer himself, or (b) Not the developer himself. If (b) then the excuse is either (i) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself, or (ii) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input.</i></p><p>Well put.  I've been shorthanding this as 'the tyranny of "patches welcome.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)".</p><p>There's an implicit discount of all software development work not done by programmers in most open source projects.  Even bug tracking tools perpetuate this by placing responsibility for bugs squarely on the shoulders of individual programmers.</p><p>A good strategy will make improve this situation in a way that makes life easier for both the programmers and the users.  I don't claim to fully understand what that solution is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Close .
To open source developers you are either ( a ) The developer himself , or ( b ) Not the developer himself .
If ( b ) then the excuse is either ( i ) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself , or ( ii ) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input.Well put .
I 've been shorthanding this as 'the tyranny of " patches welcome .
: ) " .There 's an implicit discount of all software development work not done by programmers in most open source projects .
Even bug tracking tools perpetuate this by placing responsibility for bugs squarely on the shoulders of individual programmers.A good strategy will make improve this situation in a way that makes life easier for both the programmers and the users .
I do n't claim to fully understand what that solution is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Close.
To open source developers you are either (a) The developer himself, or (b) Not the developer himself.
If (b) then the excuse is either (i) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself, or (ii) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input.Well put.
I've been shorthanding this as 'the tyranny of "patches welcome.
:)".There's an implicit discount of all software development work not done by programmers in most open source projects.
Even bug tracking tools perpetuate this by placing responsibility for bugs squarely on the shoulders of individual programmers.A good strategy will make improve this situation in a way that makes life easier for both the programmers and the users.
I don't claim to fully understand what that solution is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665199</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Risen888</author>
	<datestamp>1247330520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF, IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM, and, especially, The GIMP.</i></p><p>Actually, users don't give a fuck. That's why you've got a trendy hardware company (hint: it's the one mentioned in TFA, if you read that) named after a fruit and the biggest name in graphic design software named after a mud hut, with their flagship product named after a circus performer. Because nobody gives a fuck.</p><p>Except of course for people like you that just want to troll away in the middle of a usability discussion that's got absolutely nothing to do with your comment. For crying out loud, I can't even find anything in the comment that you're allegedly replying to that relates to your little naming rant in any way. So what exactly is it that you're on about here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF , IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM , and , especially , The GIMP.Actually , users do n't give a fuck .
That 's why you 've got a trendy hardware company ( hint : it 's the one mentioned in TFA , if you read that ) named after a fruit and the biggest name in graphic design software named after a mud hut , with their flagship product named after a circus performer .
Because nobody gives a fuck.Except of course for people like you that just want to troll away in the middle of a usability discussion that 's got absolutely nothing to do with your comment .
For crying out loud , I ca n't even find anything in the comment that you 're allegedly replying to that relates to your little naming rant in any way .
So what exactly is it that you 're on about here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF, IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM, and, especially, The GIMP.Actually, users don't give a fuck.
That's why you've got a trendy hardware company (hint: it's the one mentioned in TFA, if you read that) named after a fruit and the biggest name in graphic design software named after a mud hut, with their flagship product named after a circus performer.
Because nobody gives a fuck.Except of course for people like you that just want to troll away in the middle of a usability discussion that's got absolutely nothing to do with your comment.
For crying out loud, I can't even find anything in the comment that you're allegedly replying to that relates to your little naming rant in any way.
So what exactly is it that you're on about here?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28663887</id>
	<title>Open source doesn't need any lessons</title>
	<author>gig</author>
	<datestamp>1247312340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple is an open source success story. OS X and WebKit are massive open source successes. The iPod is as good an Internet citizen as BSD Unix. The Mac is the easiest to use computer yet gets no viruses. The Web was created on an early OS X and ported easily to open source Unix as a result.</p><p>The people who should be learning from Apple are not open source coders who work on the many successful projects. Open source is at least 1 step further into behind-the-scenes than the consumer. It's HP, Dell, Sony, possibly Google and Microsoft, and maybe other manufacturers of consumer technology like car makers who should be studying Apple very closely. Not only to notice Apple's design chops, but also to notice their very successful engineering, including open source efforts.</p><p>You only have to say "What Microsoft can Learn from Apple" and contemplate how much better Windows XP would have been if the core OS was BSD-compatible. No viruses. No botnets. All of the engineering efforts that went into the failed Windows 2004 could have been used more productively in the user-facing features. All of the engineering efforts to redo that for Vista could have been used more productively. The typical Windows user installs more patches than apps, and the patches are for stuff they never see or use. Microsoft could be platform-independent through open source, so they could choose to run Windows on ARM right now, which they are not at all prepared for. If they had done their browser engine a la Gecko and WebKit, then they wouldn't have 4 wholly incompatible engines running in great numbers on the Web right now, which they analogized to puke in a recent ad and they were the last ones to admit it. Apple has none of these problems. Apple runs the same kernel on iPod, iPhone, Mac, and XServe and no crashes or viruses anywhere.</p><p>On the other hand, with Palm, in the Pre you have a Linux kernel and WebKit browser engine replacing Windows Mobile and IE Mobile from the Treo. Because of Apple. That is Palm learning from Apple about open source.</p><p>So it's Apple's competition that needs to learn both from Apple and from open source. Apple and open source are both very successful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is an open source success story .
OS X and WebKit are massive open source successes .
The iPod is as good an Internet citizen as BSD Unix .
The Mac is the easiest to use computer yet gets no viruses .
The Web was created on an early OS X and ported easily to open source Unix as a result.The people who should be learning from Apple are not open source coders who work on the many successful projects .
Open source is at least 1 step further into behind-the-scenes than the consumer .
It 's HP , Dell , Sony , possibly Google and Microsoft , and maybe other manufacturers of consumer technology like car makers who should be studying Apple very closely .
Not only to notice Apple 's design chops , but also to notice their very successful engineering , including open source efforts.You only have to say " What Microsoft can Learn from Apple " and contemplate how much better Windows XP would have been if the core OS was BSD-compatible .
No viruses .
No botnets .
All of the engineering efforts that went into the failed Windows 2004 could have been used more productively in the user-facing features .
All of the engineering efforts to redo that for Vista could have been used more productively .
The typical Windows user installs more patches than apps , and the patches are for stuff they never see or use .
Microsoft could be platform-independent through open source , so they could choose to run Windows on ARM right now , which they are not at all prepared for .
If they had done their browser engine a la Gecko and WebKit , then they would n't have 4 wholly incompatible engines running in great numbers on the Web right now , which they analogized to puke in a recent ad and they were the last ones to admit it .
Apple has none of these problems .
Apple runs the same kernel on iPod , iPhone , Mac , and XServe and no crashes or viruses anywhere.On the other hand , with Palm , in the Pre you have a Linux kernel and WebKit browser engine replacing Windows Mobile and IE Mobile from the Treo .
Because of Apple .
That is Palm learning from Apple about open source.So it 's Apple 's competition that needs to learn both from Apple and from open source .
Apple and open source are both very successful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple is an open source success story.
OS X and WebKit are massive open source successes.
The iPod is as good an Internet citizen as BSD Unix.
The Mac is the easiest to use computer yet gets no viruses.
The Web was created on an early OS X and ported easily to open source Unix as a result.The people who should be learning from Apple are not open source coders who work on the many successful projects.
Open source is at least 1 step further into behind-the-scenes than the consumer.
It's HP, Dell, Sony, possibly Google and Microsoft, and maybe other manufacturers of consumer technology like car makers who should be studying Apple very closely.
Not only to notice Apple's design chops, but also to notice their very successful engineering, including open source efforts.You only have to say "What Microsoft can Learn from Apple" and contemplate how much better Windows XP would have been if the core OS was BSD-compatible.
No viruses.
No botnets.
All of the engineering efforts that went into the failed Windows 2004 could have been used more productively in the user-facing features.
All of the engineering efforts to redo that for Vista could have been used more productively.
The typical Windows user installs more patches than apps, and the patches are for stuff they never see or use.
Microsoft could be platform-independent through open source, so they could choose to run Windows on ARM right now, which they are not at all prepared for.
If they had done their browser engine a la Gecko and WebKit, then they wouldn't have 4 wholly incompatible engines running in great numbers on the Web right now, which they analogized to puke in a recent ad and they were the last ones to admit it.
Apple has none of these problems.
Apple runs the same kernel on iPod, iPhone, Mac, and XServe and no crashes or viruses anywhere.On the other hand, with Palm, in the Pre you have a Linux kernel and WebKit browser engine replacing Windows Mobile and IE Mobile from the Treo.
Because of Apple.
That is Palm learning from Apple about open source.So it's Apple's competition that needs to learn both from Apple and from open source.
Apple and open source are both very successful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655075</id>
	<title>It's Human Factors</title>
	<author>luwain</author>
	<datestamp>1247221140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, the key to Apple's success not so much that they include non-techies in their design process (they probably do), but that they haven't laid off their human-factors scientists. Sometimes users don't even know what would make their lives easier, but psychologists trained in human factors do. I recently "bit the bullet" and bought a MacBook (which was about $600.00 more expensive than a comparable Dell or Acer laptop), and have fallen in love with the machine. I'm fascinated by the "little things" that Apple has done: like making the touchpad larger and making it a button -- I've always hated touchpads on laptops, but this one is so well thought out that I don't ever use a mouse with the MacBook. I had a dramatic example of Apple's practical ingenuity when my dog suddenly ran across the room, right through my son's and mine power cords -- My son's Acer laptop went crashing to the floor, while the Macbook's power cord neatly detached from the machine (it connects to the machine via a small magnetic connector). I don't think a lay-person thought up these things. Every day I discover something like this about the Mac, and I wonder why other companies don't follow Apple's lead (patents??). You see this with the iPhone, also, where other phones have tried but can't seem to get the "touch and feel" quite right. I think it also should be noted that Apple is first and foremost a "hardware" company, not a software company -- they don't market MAC OS X -- they market Macs. Perhaps a Linux distribution should hook up with a good hardware company, create a really nice innovative machine and "brand it". I think this would especially work since Linux comes with so many useful professional apps (like Open Office Suite,  Gimp, Firefox, Banshee etc...) you would get a "ready to go" machine right out of the box. I have Ubuntu running on my MacBook (VMWare Fusion rocks!!) and it's a dream combination. I can't wait for those "I'm an Ubuntu" commercials<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the key to Apple 's success not so much that they include non-techies in their design process ( they probably do ) , but that they have n't laid off their human-factors scientists .
Sometimes users do n't even know what would make their lives easier , but psychologists trained in human factors do .
I recently " bit the bullet " and bought a MacBook ( which was about $ 600.00 more expensive than a comparable Dell or Acer laptop ) , and have fallen in love with the machine .
I 'm fascinated by the " little things " that Apple has done : like making the touchpad larger and making it a button -- I 've always hated touchpads on laptops , but this one is so well thought out that I do n't ever use a mouse with the MacBook .
I had a dramatic example of Apple 's practical ingenuity when my dog suddenly ran across the room , right through my son 's and mine power cords -- My son 's Acer laptop went crashing to the floor , while the Macbook 's power cord neatly detached from the machine ( it connects to the machine via a small magnetic connector ) .
I do n't think a lay-person thought up these things .
Every day I discover something like this about the Mac , and I wonder why other companies do n't follow Apple 's lead ( patents ? ? ) .
You see this with the iPhone , also , where other phones have tried but ca n't seem to get the " touch and feel " quite right .
I think it also should be noted that Apple is first and foremost a " hardware " company , not a software company -- they do n't market MAC OS X -- they market Macs .
Perhaps a Linux distribution should hook up with a good hardware company , create a really nice innovative machine and " brand it " .
I think this would especially work since Linux comes with so many useful professional apps ( like Open Office Suite , Gimp , Firefox , Banshee etc... ) you would get a " ready to go " machine right out of the box .
I have Ubuntu running on my MacBook ( VMWare Fusion rocks ! !
) and it 's a dream combination .
I ca n't wait for those " I 'm an Ubuntu " commercials : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the key to Apple's success not so much that they include non-techies in their design process (they probably do), but that they haven't laid off their human-factors scientists.
Sometimes users don't even know what would make their lives easier, but psychologists trained in human factors do.
I recently "bit the bullet" and bought a MacBook (which was about $600.00 more expensive than a comparable Dell or Acer laptop), and have fallen in love with the machine.
I'm fascinated by the "little things" that Apple has done: like making the touchpad larger and making it a button -- I've always hated touchpads on laptops, but this one is so well thought out that I don't ever use a mouse with the MacBook.
I had a dramatic example of Apple's practical ingenuity when my dog suddenly ran across the room, right through my son's and mine power cords -- My son's Acer laptop went crashing to the floor, while the Macbook's power cord neatly detached from the machine (it connects to the machine via a small magnetic connector).
I don't think a lay-person thought up these things.
Every day I discover something like this about the Mac, and I wonder why other companies don't follow Apple's lead (patents??).
You see this with the iPhone, also, where other phones have tried but can't seem to get the "touch and feel" quite right.
I think it also should be noted that Apple is first and foremost a "hardware" company, not a software company -- they don't market MAC OS X -- they market Macs.
Perhaps a Linux distribution should hook up with a good hardware company, create a really nice innovative machine and "brand it".
I think this would especially work since Linux comes with so many useful professional apps (like Open Office Suite,  Gimp, Firefox, Banshee etc...) you would get a "ready to go" machine right out of the box.
I have Ubuntu running on my MacBook (VMWare Fusion rocks!!
) and it's a dream combination.
I can't wait for those "I'm an Ubuntu" commercials :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28660415</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>JohnBailey</author>
	<datestamp>1247330220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Put yourself in the place of the average user. You just downloaded an app, played with it for an hour and it wants to upload "one megabyte of 'usage statistics'". What do you do?</p></div><p>At a guess. It depends on the user.

Windows user.. Ignore it. The internet lights look so pretty when they flash. And what's another meg or two among all the botnet traffic and spy ware calling home?

OSX user... It's the least I can do in return for being given the privelage of coming into contact with all this wonderfulness.

Linux user... Sure. So long as I can A) Opt in, not be opted in and have to go to the web site to get the thing turned off. And B) See exactly what is being sent.

But the thing is.. someone still has to look at it at the other end, and make use of it. A few million usage logs coming through every day is going to do what exactly?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Put yourself in the place of the average user .
You just downloaded an app , played with it for an hour and it wants to upload " one megabyte of 'usage statistics ' " .
What do you do ? At a guess .
It depends on the user .
Windows user.. Ignore it .
The internet lights look so pretty when they flash .
And what 's another meg or two among all the botnet traffic and spy ware calling home ?
OSX user... It 's the least I can do in return for being given the privelage of coming into contact with all this wonderfulness .
Linux user... Sure. So long as I can A ) Opt in , not be opted in and have to go to the web site to get the thing turned off .
And B ) See exactly what is being sent .
But the thing is.. someone still has to look at it at the other end , and make use of it .
A few million usage logs coming through every day is going to do what exactly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Put yourself in the place of the average user.
You just downloaded an app, played with it for an hour and it wants to upload "one megabyte of 'usage statistics'".
What do you do?At a guess.
It depends on the user.
Windows user.. Ignore it.
The internet lights look so pretty when they flash.
And what's another meg or two among all the botnet traffic and spy ware calling home?
OSX user... It's the least I can do in return for being given the privelage of coming into contact with all this wonderfulness.
Linux user... Sure. So long as I can A) Opt in, not be opted in and have to go to the web site to get the thing turned off.
And B) See exactly what is being sent.
But the thing is.. someone still has to look at it at the other end, and make use of it.
A few million usage logs coming through every day is going to do what exactly?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658377</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>orlanz</author>
	<datestamp>1247345940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you are going to get down to pure Marketing, then the first question is "Who is the customer?"  In most OSS cases, it is the developer(s), and thus most marketing to/for them is already done.  Everyone else is a user, and users aren't important, just customers are (textbooks are the classic example).  This is the key difference between "free as in beer" and commercial offerings.  I think the former creates superior solutions, and the later provides to a greater audience.<br><br>The most successful (defined by users, not developers) projects are those that create secondary/sister entities whose whole purpose is to consider the regular PC user as the potential customer base AND most importantly have some say in the SDLC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are going to get down to pure Marketing , then the first question is " Who is the customer ?
" In most OSS cases , it is the developer ( s ) , and thus most marketing to/for them is already done .
Everyone else is a user , and users are n't important , just customers are ( textbooks are the classic example ) .
This is the key difference between " free as in beer " and commercial offerings .
I think the former creates superior solutions , and the later provides to a greater audience.The most successful ( defined by users , not developers ) projects are those that create secondary/sister entities whose whole purpose is to consider the regular PC user as the potential customer base AND most importantly have some say in the SDLC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are going to get down to pure Marketing, then the first question is "Who is the customer?
"  In most OSS cases, it is the developer(s), and thus most marketing to/for them is already done.
Everyone else is a user, and users aren't important, just customers are (textbooks are the classic example).
This is the key difference between "free as in beer" and commercial offerings.
I think the former creates superior solutions, and the later provides to a greater audience.The most successful (defined by users, not developers) projects are those that create secondary/sister entities whose whole purpose is to consider the regular PC user as the potential customer base AND most importantly have some say in the SDLC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28692727</id>
	<title>Re:Downside?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247593620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Presumably the input of pilots (i.e. users) would be acceptable to you, would it?  Or are they not hardcore tech enough?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Presumably the input of pilots ( i.e .
users ) would be acceptable to you , would it ?
Or are they not hardcore tech enough ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Presumably the input of pilots (i.e.
users) would be acceptable to you, would it?
Or are they not hardcore tech enough?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658599</id>
	<title>Re:Apple is the bipolar opposite of open source</title>
	<author>Ma8thew</author>
	<datestamp>1247307360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bullshit. You really think that Steve Jobs controls the minutiae of everything Apple produces? He steers the company, and is probably more involved in product development than most CEOs, but there are plenty within Apple who share his vision and his taste. Steve Jobs does not design anything, he just vetoes and approves products. He will appoint a successor, and Apple will go on much as before. The past six months proved Apple can operate without him, even with the biggest product launch in their history.</p><p>I'd also take issue with your assertion that free software is independent of personalities. Would the FSF be the same without Richard Stallman? Linux without Linus? If anything, open source products are often more centred around one individual, as it is frequently a labour of love.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bullshit .
You really think that Steve Jobs controls the minutiae of everything Apple produces ?
He steers the company , and is probably more involved in product development than most CEOs , but there are plenty within Apple who share his vision and his taste .
Steve Jobs does not design anything , he just vetoes and approves products .
He will appoint a successor , and Apple will go on much as before .
The past six months proved Apple can operate without him , even with the biggest product launch in their history.I 'd also take issue with your assertion that free software is independent of personalities .
Would the FSF be the same without Richard Stallman ?
Linux without Linus ?
If anything , open source products are often more centred around one individual , as it is frequently a labour of love .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bullshit.
You really think that Steve Jobs controls the minutiae of everything Apple produces?
He steers the company, and is probably more involved in product development than most CEOs, but there are plenty within Apple who share his vision and his taste.
Steve Jobs does not design anything, he just vetoes and approves products.
He will appoint a successor, and Apple will go on much as before.
The past six months proved Apple can operate without him, even with the biggest product launch in their history.I'd also take issue with your assertion that free software is independent of personalities.
Would the FSF be the same without Richard Stallman?
Linux without Linus?
If anything, open source products are often more centred around one individual, as it is frequently a labour of love.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653595</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656837</id>
	<title>Is that you Michael Dell?</title>
	<author>andersh</author>
	<datestamp>1247235420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is that you Michael Dell?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that you Michael Dell ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that you Michael Dell?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653595</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659079</id>
	<title>Re:Focus on what the user wants</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1247317740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the problem is not so much modal dialogs, but when they are only used to report on something (bit of text and a single button, anyone?).</p><p>then there are things like focus stealing, and having either of the buttons have keyboard focus (i wonder how many times i have had something pop up from behind, only to go poof because i was typing something at the time and hit either space or return).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the problem is not so much modal dialogs , but when they are only used to report on something ( bit of text and a single button , anyone ?
) .then there are things like focus stealing , and having either of the buttons have keyboard focus ( i wonder how many times i have had something pop up from behind , only to go poof because i was typing something at the time and hit either space or return ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the problem is not so much modal dialogs, but when they are only used to report on something (bit of text and a single button, anyone?
).then there are things like focus stealing, and having either of the buttons have keyboard focus (i wonder how many times i have had something pop up from behind, only to go poof because i was typing something at the time and hit either space or return).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"However, users are clueless about what they really want and you can't possibly use them to write the specs of your product!"</p><p>This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands. To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.</p><p>I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design. But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life. Does this make my input useless?</p><p>For example, I've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability, but the development team doesn't seem to care.</p><p>Open source is always talking about how they can win over more users. But how do you win over users if you don't focus on usability?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" However , users are clueless about what they really want and you ca n't possibly use them to write the specs of your product !
" This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source 's attitude towards user demands .
To them you are either ( a ) a Programmer , or ( b ) a Grandma.I 'm an IT professional , a power user , and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design .
But I 've never coded a line of C + + in my entire life .
Does this make my input useless ? For example , I 've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability , but the development team does n't seem to care.Open source is always talking about how they can win over more users .
But how do you win over users if you do n't focus on usability ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"However, users are clueless about what they really want and you can't possibly use them to write the specs of your product!
"This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands.
To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design.
But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life.
Does this make my input useless?For example, I've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability, but the development team doesn't seem to care.Open source is always talking about how they can win over more users.
But how do you win over users if you don't focus on usability?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666817</id>
	<title>Re:Apple is the bipolar opposite of open source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247406420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  Modded as Interesting?</p><p>&gt; Open Source will outlive any particular person</p><p>but will anyone care?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
Modded as Interesting ? &gt; Open Source will outlive any particular personbut will anyone care ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
Modded as Interesting?&gt; Open Source will outlive any particular personbut will anyone care?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653595</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653853</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Ant P.</author>
	<datestamp>1247257860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem, of course, is that the same guys doing the codewriting are the same guys doing the naming and marketing</p></div><p>This is why Ubuntu is so popular now - the same marketdroids making all those flashy "cool" names for Microsoft apps also have control over how the software is written.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem , of course , is that the same guys doing the codewriting are the same guys doing the naming and marketingThis is why Ubuntu is so popular now - the same marketdroids making all those flashy " cool " names for Microsoft apps also have control over how the software is written .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem, of course, is that the same guys doing the codewriting are the same guys doing the naming and marketingThis is why Ubuntu is so popular now - the same marketdroids making all those flashy "cool" names for Microsoft apps also have control over how the software is written.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654345</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>RobBebop</author>
	<datestamp>1247217120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I can think of one approach that might work: build a really good analytics library that would measure various usability aspects.</p></div><p>A simple "Suggestion Box" would probably suffice.  Firefox screws up a number of tasks that I give it from time-to-time.  The single most beneficial feature they've ever added is that it recovers my open tabs after any crash, though.  So in effect, I typically don't have to deal with the problems when they occur.

</p><p>However, for weird stuff (e.g. plug-ins failing and then disabling themselves) it'd be nice to have an easy to find "Suggestion Box".  I'd even accept an invitation to right click the toolbar area and choose "Customize Toolbar" to add "Suggestion Box" to replace the little "Home" button that I don't have a real use for.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can think of one approach that might work : build a really good analytics library that would measure various usability aspects.A simple " Suggestion Box " would probably suffice .
Firefox screws up a number of tasks that I give it from time-to-time .
The single most beneficial feature they 've ever added is that it recovers my open tabs after any crash , though .
So in effect , I typically do n't have to deal with the problems when they occur .
However , for weird stuff ( e.g .
plug-ins failing and then disabling themselves ) it 'd be nice to have an easy to find " Suggestion Box " .
I 'd even accept an invitation to right click the toolbar area and choose " Customize Toolbar " to add " Suggestion Box " to replace the little " Home " button that I do n't have a real use for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can think of one approach that might work: build a really good analytics library that would measure various usability aspects.A simple "Suggestion Box" would probably suffice.
Firefox screws up a number of tasks that I give it from time-to-time.
The single most beneficial feature they've ever added is that it recovers my open tabs after any crash, though.
So in effect, I typically don't have to deal with the problems when they occur.
However, for weird stuff (e.g.
plug-ins failing and then disabling themselves) it'd be nice to have an easy to find "Suggestion Box".
I'd even accept an invitation to right click the toolbar area and choose "Customize Toolbar" to add "Suggestion Box" to replace the little "Home" button that I don't have a real use for.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655353</id>
	<title>How wide an audience do we actually want?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247223060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The truth is that what makes so much open-source software so great is fundamentally incompatible with the desires of the normal, day-to-day morons who make up the "wider" demographic. Typical users hate options; they want things to "just work." They hate not having the Start button in the lower left corner of the screen. They're lazy cretins who don't want to have to learn that it might be at the *top* of the screen instead, much less that there is no C: drive. They never want to have to set up their hardware; they'd rather have huge swaths of memory and disk space taken up by seldom-if-ever used drivers just in case they ever want to attach that random device. If compromise on the power of open source is what is necessary - and to some extent, it is - then forget them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The truth is that what makes so much open-source software so great is fundamentally incompatible with the desires of the normal , day-to-day morons who make up the " wider " demographic .
Typical users hate options ; they want things to " just work .
" They hate not having the Start button in the lower left corner of the screen .
They 're lazy cretins who do n't want to have to learn that it might be at the * top * of the screen instead , much less that there is no C : drive .
They never want to have to set up their hardware ; they 'd rather have huge swaths of memory and disk space taken up by seldom-if-ever used drivers just in case they ever want to attach that random device .
If compromise on the power of open source is what is necessary - and to some extent , it is - then forget them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The truth is that what makes so much open-source software so great is fundamentally incompatible with the desires of the normal, day-to-day morons who make up the "wider" demographic.
Typical users hate options; they want things to "just work.
" They hate not having the Start button in the lower left corner of the screen.
They're lazy cretins who don't want to have to learn that it might be at the *top* of the screen instead, much less that there is no C: drive.
They never want to have to set up their hardware; they'd rather have huge swaths of memory and disk space taken up by seldom-if-ever used drivers just in case they ever want to attach that random device.
If compromise on the power of open source is what is necessary - and to some extent, it is - then forget them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654761</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247219160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands. To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma."<br>OK, fine, stick to your closed source software which I'm sure listens to all your complaints and changes their software because someone said they didn't like something.</p><p>"...But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life. Does this make my input useless?..."<br>Well I'm sure you think your idea is special and all, but when is the last time you have successfully convinced a closed source project to change their usability just because you said so.</p><p>You're talking about how open source is so bad. I think you forgot to mention that closed source isn't better.<br>At least open source projects have some way of publicly letting people add ideas and bugs to their base and talking it over with developers.<br>Some good examples: bugzilla which is used by a lot of oss, ubuntu's idea pad or whatever it's called.</p><p>P.S. IIRC, Thunderbird is partly coded in C++.<br>P.S.S. obligated quote http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUzUbtIptqQ</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source 's attitude towards user demands .
To them you are either ( a ) a Programmer , or ( b ) a Grandma .
" OK , fine , stick to your closed source software which I 'm sure listens to all your complaints and changes their software because someone said they did n't like something .
" ...But I 've never coded a line of C + + in my entire life .
Does this make my input useless ? .. .
" Well I 'm sure you think your idea is special and all , but when is the last time you have successfully convinced a closed source project to change their usability just because you said so.You 're talking about how open source is so bad .
I think you forgot to mention that closed source is n't better.At least open source projects have some way of publicly letting people add ideas and bugs to their base and talking it over with developers.Some good examples : bugzilla which is used by a lot of oss , ubuntu 's idea pad or whatever it 's called.P.S .
IIRC , Thunderbird is partly coded in C + + .P.S.S .
obligated quote http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = SUzUbtIptqQ</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands.
To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.
"OK, fine, stick to your closed source software which I'm sure listens to all your complaints and changes their software because someone said they didn't like something.
"...But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life.
Does this make my input useless?...
"Well I'm sure you think your idea is special and all, but when is the last time you have successfully convinced a closed source project to change their usability just because you said so.You're talking about how open source is so bad.
I think you forgot to mention that closed source isn't better.At least open source projects have some way of publicly letting people add ideas and bugs to their base and talking it over with developers.Some good examples: bugzilla which is used by a lot of oss, ubuntu's idea pad or whatever it's called.P.S.
IIRC, Thunderbird is partly coded in C++.P.S.S.
obligated quote http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUzUbtIptqQ
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653113</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>hobbit</author>
	<datestamp>1247254740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But would user analysts spend their spare time analysing users like hackers spend their spare time hacking?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But would user analysts spend their spare time analysing users like hackers spend their spare time hacking ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But would user analysts spend their spare time analysing users like hackers spend their spare time hacking?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656761</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>mattack2</author>
	<datestamp>1247234700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>But then again, Apple devs ignored all my complaints about the Finder when they removed the horizontal scroll bar from the Finder when you clicked on a special location awhile back too.</p></div></blockquote><p>What 'special location' are you talking about?  and what's the bug # for the bug you wrote up?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But then again , Apple devs ignored all my complaints about the Finder when they removed the horizontal scroll bar from the Finder when you clicked on a special location awhile back too.What 'special location ' are you talking about ?
and what 's the bug # for the bug you wrote up ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But then again, Apple devs ignored all my complaints about the Finder when they removed the horizontal scroll bar from the Finder when you clicked on a special location awhile back too.What 'special location' are you talking about?
and what's the bug # for the bug you wrote up?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658455</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>EvilIdler</author>
	<datestamp>1247304300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, bugfixes can take a while. I reported a bug in one distro back around xmas 2005, and it was assigned to someone a few months ago. Not reported fixed, mind you. ASSIGNED to someone who presumably knows what to do with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , bugfixes can take a while .
I reported a bug in one distro back around xmas 2005 , and it was assigned to someone a few months ago .
Not reported fixed , mind you .
ASSIGNED to someone who presumably knows what to do with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, bugfixes can take a while.
I reported a bug in one distro back around xmas 2005, and it was assigned to someone a few months ago.
Not reported fixed, mind you.
ASSIGNED to someone who presumably knows what to do with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653209</id>
	<title>That a single cohesive vision...</title>
	<author>rAiNsT0rm</author>
	<datestamp>1247255100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is actually better than a chaotic/bazaar mess that spins it wheels for 15 years? No shit!? Man, I mean while everyone blabs on and on about the bazaar and how great the chaotic development is, it isn't good enough for that central part: The Kernel. So why in the hell we keep fighting a cohesive and directed effort to build at least a baseline for the entire OS is beyond me.</p><p>This is why I gave up on Linux for all but my servers. One day it will happen, or Google/Ubuntu will do it first. At this point I don't even care, just that it happens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is actually better than a chaotic/bazaar mess that spins it wheels for 15 years ?
No shit ! ?
Man , I mean while everyone blabs on and on about the bazaar and how great the chaotic development is , it is n't good enough for that central part : The Kernel .
So why in the hell we keep fighting a cohesive and directed effort to build at least a baseline for the entire OS is beyond me.This is why I gave up on Linux for all but my servers .
One day it will happen , or Google/Ubuntu will do it first .
At this point I do n't even care , just that it happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is actually better than a chaotic/bazaar mess that spins it wheels for 15 years?
No shit!?
Man, I mean while everyone blabs on and on about the bazaar and how great the chaotic development is, it isn't good enough for that central part: The Kernel.
So why in the hell we keep fighting a cohesive and directed effort to build at least a baseline for the entire OS is beyond me.This is why I gave up on Linux for all but my servers.
One day it will happen, or Google/Ubuntu will do it first.
At this point I don't even care, just that it happens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28678633</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247507820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No, actually it is overlooked because people balk at the terrible interface and go back to Photoshop.</p></div><p>Hotmail? Seriously? U r a microsoft/pay for software, blinded eunuch slave. Go grow a pair and RTFM on GIMP. It is so much better than Photoshop, and its FREEE and works on every platform. The end.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , actually it is overlooked because people balk at the terrible interface and go back to Photoshop.Hotmail ?
Seriously ? U r a microsoft/pay for software , blinded eunuch slave .
Go grow a pair and RTFM on GIMP .
It is so much better than Photoshop , and its FREEE and works on every platform .
The end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, actually it is overlooked because people balk at the terrible interface and go back to Photoshop.Hotmail?
Seriously? U r a microsoft/pay for software, blinded eunuch slave.
Go grow a pair and RTFM on GIMP.
It is so much better than Photoshop, and its FREEE and works on every platform.
The end.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656107</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655129</id>
	<title>Not the best example</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1247221560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Steve Jobs once quoted Henry Ford regarding how they feel about what customers think they want: "If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse."</i> </p><p>Ford was still producing the Model T well into the 1920s - despite alarming declines in sales. The Ford came with a hand crank until 1919.</p><p> Ford's competitors were offering better styling, better brakes, suspensions and so on.</p><p>Ford offered one of the first farm tractors. But it was Ferguson and John Deere that introduced the PTO and three-point hitch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Steve Jobs once quoted Henry Ford regarding how they feel about what customers think they want : " If I 'd asked my customers what they wanted , they 'd have said a faster horse .
" Ford was still producing the Model T well into the 1920s - despite alarming declines in sales .
The Ford came with a hand crank until 1919 .
Ford 's competitors were offering better styling , better brakes , suspensions and so on.Ford offered one of the first farm tractors .
But it was Ferguson and John Deere that introduced the PTO and three-point hitch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steve Jobs once quoted Henry Ford regarding how they feel about what customers think they want: "If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse.
" Ford was still producing the Model T well into the 1920s - despite alarming declines in sales.
The Ford came with a hand crank until 1919.
Ford's competitors were offering better styling, better brakes, suspensions and so on.Ford offered one of the first farm tractors.
But it was Ferguson and John Deere that introduced the PTO and three-point hitch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653253</id>
	<title>Open source needs a god</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A sexy one...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A sexy one.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A sexy one...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655007</id>
	<title>Re:Focus on what the user wants</title>
	<author>Actually, I do RTFA</author>
	<datestamp>1247220780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Use zero modal dialogs. They force the user to act at the software's behest to continue doing what they want. Making the user your software's bitch.</p></div></blockquote><p>This is the one thing I take issue with.  Modal dialogs shouldn't interupt the normal user flow, but sometimes you have to use them.  Typically, this is when something irreversable is about to happen that is probably an unintended side-effect of what's happening:  "You are about to exit, save changes?"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Use zero modal dialogs .
They force the user to act at the software 's behest to continue doing what they want .
Making the user your software 's bitch.This is the one thing I take issue with .
Modal dialogs should n't interupt the normal user flow , but sometimes you have to use them .
Typically , this is when something irreversable is about to happen that is probably an unintended side-effect of what 's happening : " You are about to exit , save changes ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use zero modal dialogs.
They force the user to act at the software's behest to continue doing what they want.
Making the user your software's bitch.This is the one thing I take issue with.
Modal dialogs shouldn't interupt the normal user flow, but sometimes you have to use them.
Typically, this is when something irreversable is about to happen that is probably an unintended side-effect of what's happening:  "You are about to exit, save changes?
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655119</id>
	<title>Re:Downside?</title>
	<author>Trojan35</author>
	<datestamp>1247221440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the point. Successful commercial aircraft also have input from Marketing (hopefully telling you what Southwest and Passengers actually want), Finance (telling you if that feature is actually worth the cost/effort), and QA (telling you if that feature will actually be reliable).</p><p>So yes, a commercial aircraft only being designed by aeronautical engineers would be a failure, IMO. And that is the problem that faces Open Source projects today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the point .
Successful commercial aircraft also have input from Marketing ( hopefully telling you what Southwest and Passengers actually want ) , Finance ( telling you if that feature is actually worth the cost/effort ) , and QA ( telling you if that feature will actually be reliable ) .So yes , a commercial aircraft only being designed by aeronautical engineers would be a failure , IMO .
And that is the problem that faces Open Source projects today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the point.
Successful commercial aircraft also have input from Marketing (hopefully telling you what Southwest and Passengers actually want), Finance (telling you if that feature is actually worth the cost/effort), and QA (telling you if that feature will actually be reliable).So yes, a commercial aircraft only being designed by aeronautical engineers would be a failure, IMO.
And that is the problem that faces Open Source projects today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652747</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>ByOhTek</author>
	<datestamp>1247253360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think a bit better of a way to put it:</p><p>5 out of 10 users know what they want, but can't express it in a manner that communicates it sufficiently well to achieve it.<br>4 out of 10 users haven't a clue what they want, but think they do.<br>1 out of 1 users know what they want and can express it.</p><p>And then you have the developers, who want to make something with nice nifty features, but don't want to be bothered with the polish.</p><p>This reminds me of a friend who is a senior analyist has a paper on her cube wall, I've seen two variants of the theme. It has a picture of a sports car with the caption "What the users want". This is followed by the picture of a UFO (in some variants a fighter jet) with "What the developers want to make". This is followed by "What the company is willing to spend money on" and it has some small compact car. And then finally, a picture of a really funny looking "tricked out" tricycle with the caption "What ends up being produced".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think a bit better of a way to put it : 5 out of 10 users know what they want , but ca n't express it in a manner that communicates it sufficiently well to achieve it.4 out of 10 users have n't a clue what they want , but think they do.1 out of 1 users know what they want and can express it.And then you have the developers , who want to make something with nice nifty features , but do n't want to be bothered with the polish.This reminds me of a friend who is a senior analyist has a paper on her cube wall , I 've seen two variants of the theme .
It has a picture of a sports car with the caption " What the users want " .
This is followed by the picture of a UFO ( in some variants a fighter jet ) with " What the developers want to make " .
This is followed by " What the company is willing to spend money on " and it has some small compact car .
And then finally , a picture of a really funny looking " tricked out " tricycle with the caption " What ends up being produced " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think a bit better of a way to put it:5 out of 10 users know what they want, but can't express it in a manner that communicates it sufficiently well to achieve it.4 out of 10 users haven't a clue what they want, but think they do.1 out of 1 users know what they want and can express it.And then you have the developers, who want to make something with nice nifty features, but don't want to be bothered with the polish.This reminds me of a friend who is a senior analyist has a paper on her cube wall, I've seen two variants of the theme.
It has a picture of a sports car with the caption "What the users want".
This is followed by the picture of a UFO (in some variants a fighter jet) with "What the developers want to make".
This is followed by "What the company is willing to spend money on" and it has some small compact car.
And then finally, a picture of a really funny looking "tricked out" tricycle with the caption "What ends up being produced".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654341</id>
	<title>Re:Downside?</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1247217060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, if you're running a commercial airline and you allow the aeronautical engineers to design the interior of the aircraft (including seats, lighting, fixtures) without including anyone with interior design experience, then yes, that might be a problem.  If you allow the aeronautical engineers to design the menu for the inflight meals without consulting any kind of chef or caterer, then that might be a problem too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if you 're running a commercial airline and you allow the aeronautical engineers to design the interior of the aircraft ( including seats , lighting , fixtures ) without including anyone with interior design experience , then yes , that might be a problem .
If you allow the aeronautical engineers to design the menu for the inflight meals without consulting any kind of chef or caterer , then that might be a problem too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if you're running a commercial airline and you allow the aeronautical engineers to design the interior of the aircraft (including seats, lighting, fixtures) without including anyone with interior design experience, then yes, that might be a problem.
If you allow the aeronautical engineers to design the menu for the inflight meals without consulting any kind of chef or caterer, then that might be a problem too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656493</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247232180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From a lot of developers point of view, making it attractive to users is irrelevant. We do that for our day jobs. What people don't get is that this is, for a lot of developers, a hobby. I built a binary clock in my garage the other day. It's cool, it works, it keeps accurate time, it's amusing to my geeky sensitivities. If anybody wants my to build them one, I'll do it for pleasure. I'd be happy to post circuit diagrams and the source for the microcontroller if I thought it worthy. I will not produce a manual explaining to people who don't really want to know what binary is and how to read my clock. I don't care if it's all asymmetrical due to prototype boards. It gave me a lot of joy and much needed relaxation when I designed and built it. It makes me smile when I look at it. That's all that matters.<br> <br>

OTOH people are not trying to use my little garage project for serious work. Yes, we do it for love - you say that like it's a bad thing! And you know what? Where it really matters, most Open Source projects are really well made. Unix admins appreciate Linux. It's written by us, for us. It is very good, easy to use if you know what you're doing and yes, it's stable. I couldn't care less if your grandma can't use it. That's what Apple is for. (Sorry but it's completely beyond me why people still use Windows).<br> <br>

I understand the need for a company to make money, but excessive marketing causes way more evil than poorly designed user interfaces. I mean, I saw personally indigenous women in the Amazon spending a week's pay on cosmetics because, looking at local advertising, they were led to believe it would make them tall and blonde. Seriously.<br> <br>

I hope against all hope that you people stay out of my garage and that marketing stops polluting the stuff we, engineers, do for love.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From a lot of developers point of view , making it attractive to users is irrelevant .
We do that for our day jobs .
What people do n't get is that this is , for a lot of developers , a hobby .
I built a binary clock in my garage the other day .
It 's cool , it works , it keeps accurate time , it 's amusing to my geeky sensitivities .
If anybody wants my to build them one , I 'll do it for pleasure .
I 'd be happy to post circuit diagrams and the source for the microcontroller if I thought it worthy .
I will not produce a manual explaining to people who do n't really want to know what binary is and how to read my clock .
I do n't care if it 's all asymmetrical due to prototype boards .
It gave me a lot of joy and much needed relaxation when I designed and built it .
It makes me smile when I look at it .
That 's all that matters .
OTOH people are not trying to use my little garage project for serious work .
Yes , we do it for love - you say that like it 's a bad thing !
And you know what ?
Where it really matters , most Open Source projects are really well made .
Unix admins appreciate Linux .
It 's written by us , for us .
It is very good , easy to use if you know what you 're doing and yes , it 's stable .
I could n't care less if your grandma ca n't use it .
That 's what Apple is for .
( Sorry but it 's completely beyond me why people still use Windows ) .
I understand the need for a company to make money , but excessive marketing causes way more evil than poorly designed user interfaces .
I mean , I saw personally indigenous women in the Amazon spending a week 's pay on cosmetics because , looking at local advertising , they were led to believe it would make them tall and blonde .
Seriously . I hope against all hope that you people stay out of my garage and that marketing stops polluting the stuff we , engineers , do for love .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a lot of developers point of view, making it attractive to users is irrelevant.
We do that for our day jobs.
What people don't get is that this is, for a lot of developers, a hobby.
I built a binary clock in my garage the other day.
It's cool, it works, it keeps accurate time, it's amusing to my geeky sensitivities.
If anybody wants my to build them one, I'll do it for pleasure.
I'd be happy to post circuit diagrams and the source for the microcontroller if I thought it worthy.
I will not produce a manual explaining to people who don't really want to know what binary is and how to read my clock.
I don't care if it's all asymmetrical due to prototype boards.
It gave me a lot of joy and much needed relaxation when I designed and built it.
It makes me smile when I look at it.
That's all that matters.
OTOH people are not trying to use my little garage project for serious work.
Yes, we do it for love - you say that like it's a bad thing!
And you know what?
Where it really matters, most Open Source projects are really well made.
Unix admins appreciate Linux.
It's written by us, for us.
It is very good, easy to use if you know what you're doing and yes, it's stable.
I couldn't care less if your grandma can't use it.
That's what Apple is for.
(Sorry but it's completely beyond me why people still use Windows).
I understand the need for a company to make money, but excessive marketing causes way more evil than poorly designed user interfaces.
I mean, I saw personally indigenous women in the Amazon spending a week's pay on cosmetics because, looking at local advertising, they were led to believe it would make them tall and blonde.
Seriously. 

I hope against all hope that you people stay out of my garage and that marketing stops polluting the stuff we, engineers, do for love.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655429</id>
	<title>A coherent "Linux Desktop"?</title>
	<author>bgspence</author>
	<datestamp>1247223660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The hope for a coherent "Linux Desktop" is a mirage. It can never occur.</p><p>In "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" Eric Raymond examines two software development models. One restricted and the other open. The Bazaar model has the advantage that "given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow" but I would say that given enough designers all Cathedrals are bazaar. Bug free, but incoherent.</p><p>He agrees that it is necessary to "define goals and keep everybody pointed in the same direction" and that "it's fairly clear that one cannot code from the ground up in bazaar style. One can test, debug and improve in bazaar style, but it would be very hard to originate a project in bazaar mode." The "Linux Desktop" originated in bazaar mode.</p><p>A coherent "Linux Desktop" cannot converge from hundreds of application visions without strong outside forces. Apple's desktop evolved in an environment with strong design guidelines enforced by both a benevolent dictator from within and a demanding user base from without. It originated with the well documented "Apple Human Interface Guidelines". <a href="http://devworld.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/XHIGHIDesign/XHIGHIDesign.html#//apple\_ref/doc/uid/TP30000353-TP6" title="apple.com">http://devworld.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/XHIGHIDesign/XHIGHIDesign.html#//apple\_ref/doc/uid/TP30000353-TP6</a> [apple.com] The pragmatics evolved over the years, but the basic principles are as true today as they ever were.</p><p>Until the Bazaar development community operates under a the dictates of a powerful "Home Owners Association", it will continue to look and feel like trailer trash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The hope for a coherent " Linux Desktop " is a mirage .
It can never occur.In " The Cathedral and the Bazaar " Eric Raymond examines two software development models .
One restricted and the other open .
The Bazaar model has the advantage that " given enough eyeballs , all bugs are shallow " but I would say that given enough designers all Cathedrals are bazaar .
Bug free , but incoherent.He agrees that it is necessary to " define goals and keep everybody pointed in the same direction " and that " it 's fairly clear that one can not code from the ground up in bazaar style .
One can test , debug and improve in bazaar style , but it would be very hard to originate a project in bazaar mode .
" The " Linux Desktop " originated in bazaar mode.A coherent " Linux Desktop " can not converge from hundreds of application visions without strong outside forces .
Apple 's desktop evolved in an environment with strong design guidelines enforced by both a benevolent dictator from within and a demanding user base from without .
It originated with the well documented " Apple Human Interface Guidelines " .
http : //devworld.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/XHIGHIDesign/XHIGHIDesign.html # //apple \ _ref/doc/uid/TP30000353-TP6 [ apple.com ] The pragmatics evolved over the years , but the basic principles are as true today as they ever were.Until the Bazaar development community operates under a the dictates of a powerful " Home Owners Association " , it will continue to look and feel like trailer trash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hope for a coherent "Linux Desktop" is a mirage.
It can never occur.In "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" Eric Raymond examines two software development models.
One restricted and the other open.
The Bazaar model has the advantage that "given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow" but I would say that given enough designers all Cathedrals are bazaar.
Bug free, but incoherent.He agrees that it is necessary to "define goals and keep everybody pointed in the same direction" and that "it's fairly clear that one cannot code from the ground up in bazaar style.
One can test, debug and improve in bazaar style, but it would be very hard to originate a project in bazaar mode.
" The "Linux Desktop" originated in bazaar mode.A coherent "Linux Desktop" cannot converge from hundreds of application visions without strong outside forces.
Apple's desktop evolved in an environment with strong design guidelines enforced by both a benevolent dictator from within and a demanding user base from without.
It originated with the well documented "Apple Human Interface Guidelines".
http://devworld.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/XHIGHIDesign/XHIGHIDesign.html#//apple\_ref/doc/uid/TP30000353-TP6 [apple.com] The pragmatics evolved over the years, but the basic principles are as true today as they ever were.Until the Bazaar development community operates under a the dictates of a powerful "Home Owners Association", it will continue to look and feel like trailer trash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653935</id>
	<title>Firs7 post</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247258280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>to fight what has world. GNNA members</htmltext>
<tokenext>to fight what has world .
GNNA members</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to fight what has world.
GNNA members</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28693789</id>
	<title>Features are just part of the user experience</title>
	<author>trayser</author>
	<datestamp>1247597760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What most developers of poorly designed software forget is that the features are just part of your application's user experience. The
larger portion of the user-experience is the aesthetics and usability of an application.

aesthetics and usability help in two crucial areas :
1. The first impression : It is the first impression of an applications that would make or break a deal. Very few users would read the technical specs/feature set of an applications. Most will decide on whether to use an application based on its first impression. In my opinion, aesthetics is the major reason among windows to mac switchers. Many say they use mac because 'it just works'. However, they would be able to decide on whether it works only after they use the mac for a while (I mean not just the 5-10 mins in apple store). Some might get a chance to use the mac at their workplace or use a friend's mac. But I believe most of them really decide on  switching based on aesthetics alone.
[This might be a very controversial statement, but somewhere deep inside in our brain we are wired to make our decisions based on aesthetics (or beauty) if we have to make a quick decision, probably because the other factors like tech specs and usability would take more time]

2. Loyalty : This is another area where aesthetics and usability play an important role. I person might be using your software for its features (or because there is no other alternative) but he/she would switch to another software in heartbeat if the other software has almost the same feature set but a better looking UI. On the other hand a person using a well designed software would hesitate to switch to a feature rich application if its UI is crappy.

Here is my personal experience. I had been a devout user of open source software including the Linux OS for quite a few years. Last year I decided to buy a desktop since my old machines couldn't be upgraded any better. I decided to go for mac instead of windows. Now when I need any particular software, I still try to find an open-source alternative, but then I also look for an equivalent software from apple or any other mac developer. Usually the apple/mac software has almost all the features that I need , is priced at $20-$40, and has a much more beautiful UI. After about a month of testing both, the open-source software and trial version of  apple/mac software, I normally end up buying the apple/mac version.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What most developers of poorly designed software forget is that the features are just part of your application 's user experience .
The larger portion of the user-experience is the aesthetics and usability of an application .
aesthetics and usability help in two crucial areas : 1 .
The first impression : It is the first impression of an applications that would make or break a deal .
Very few users would read the technical specs/feature set of an applications .
Most will decide on whether to use an application based on its first impression .
In my opinion , aesthetics is the major reason among windows to mac switchers .
Many say they use mac because 'it just works' .
However , they would be able to decide on whether it works only after they use the mac for a while ( I mean not just the 5-10 mins in apple store ) .
Some might get a chance to use the mac at their workplace or use a friend 's mac .
But I believe most of them really decide on switching based on aesthetics alone .
[ This might be a very controversial statement , but somewhere deep inside in our brain we are wired to make our decisions based on aesthetics ( or beauty ) if we have to make a quick decision , probably because the other factors like tech specs and usability would take more time ] 2 .
Loyalty : This is another area where aesthetics and usability play an important role .
I person might be using your software for its features ( or because there is no other alternative ) but he/she would switch to another software in heartbeat if the other software has almost the same feature set but a better looking UI .
On the other hand a person using a well designed software would hesitate to switch to a feature rich application if its UI is crappy .
Here is my personal experience .
I had been a devout user of open source software including the Linux OS for quite a few years .
Last year I decided to buy a desktop since my old machines could n't be upgraded any better .
I decided to go for mac instead of windows .
Now when I need any particular software , I still try to find an open-source alternative , but then I also look for an equivalent software from apple or any other mac developer .
Usually the apple/mac software has almost all the features that I need , is priced at $ 20- $ 40 , and has a much more beautiful UI .
After about a month of testing both , the open-source software and trial version of apple/mac software , I normally end up buying the apple/mac version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What most developers of poorly designed software forget is that the features are just part of your application's user experience.
The
larger portion of the user-experience is the aesthetics and usability of an application.
aesthetics and usability help in two crucial areas :
1.
The first impression : It is the first impression of an applications that would make or break a deal.
Very few users would read the technical specs/feature set of an applications.
Most will decide on whether to use an application based on its first impression.
In my opinion, aesthetics is the major reason among windows to mac switchers.
Many say they use mac because 'it just works'.
However, they would be able to decide on whether it works only after they use the mac for a while (I mean not just the 5-10 mins in apple store).
Some might get a chance to use the mac at their workplace or use a friend's mac.
But I believe most of them really decide on  switching based on aesthetics alone.
[This might be a very controversial statement, but somewhere deep inside in our brain we are wired to make our decisions based on aesthetics (or beauty) if we have to make a quick decision, probably because the other factors like tech specs and usability would take more time]

2.
Loyalty : This is another area where aesthetics and usability play an important role.
I person might be using your software for its features (or because there is no other alternative) but he/she would switch to another software in heartbeat if the other software has almost the same feature set but a better looking UI.
On the other hand a person using a well designed software would hesitate to switch to a feature rich application if its UI is crappy.
Here is my personal experience.
I had been a devout user of open source software including the Linux OS for quite a few years.
Last year I decided to buy a desktop since my old machines couldn't be upgraded any better.
I decided to go for mac instead of windows.
Now when I need any particular software, I still try to find an open-source alternative, but then I also look for an equivalent software from apple or any other mac developer.
Usually the apple/mac software has almost all the features that I need , is priced at $20-$40, and has a much more beautiful UI.
After about a month of testing both, the open-source software and trial version of  apple/mac software, I normally end up buying the apple/mac version.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666783</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247405520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Why isn't there any open-source marketing?</p><p>Probably because they realise that they could spend their time more effectively making money on paying projects...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Why is n't there any open-source marketing ? Probably because they realise that they could spend their time more effectively making money on paying projects.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Why isn't there any open-source marketing?Probably because they realise that they could spend their time more effectively making money on paying projects...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655473</id>
	<title>the problem with linux on the desktop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247224020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with linux on the desktop IS THAT IT'S RUBBISH.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with linux on the desktop IS THAT IT 'S RUBBISH .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with linux on the desktop IS THAT IT'S RUBBISH.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654941</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>davek</author>
	<datestamp>1247220240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe the idea you're talking about is the famous "how to build a tire swing" comic:</p><p><a href="http://6thstreetradio.org/foruma/viewtopic.php?f=3&amp;t=61#p76" title="6thstreetradio.org">http://6thstreetradio.org/foruma/viewtopic.php?f=3&amp;t=61#p76</a> [6thstreetradio.org]</p><p>(originally posted on stack overflow)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the idea you 're talking about is the famous " how to build a tire swing " comic : http : //6thstreetradio.org/foruma/viewtopic.php ? f = 3&amp;t = 61 # p76 [ 6thstreetradio.org ] ( originally posted on stack overflow )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the idea you're talking about is the famous "how to build a tire swing" comic:http://6thstreetradio.org/foruma/viewtopic.php?f=3&amp;t=61#p76 [6thstreetradio.org](originally posted on stack overflow)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653757</id>
	<title>You already can...</title>
	<author>i.r.id10t</author>
	<datestamp>1247257380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You already can, if you have just minor technical skill.  Simply, the ability and willingness to explore menu options, figure out how to actually *use* the app, and make great documentation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You already can , if you have just minor technical skill .
Simply , the ability and willingness to explore menu options , figure out how to actually * use * the app , and make great documentation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You already can, if you have just minor technical skill.
Simply, the ability and willingness to explore menu options, figure out how to actually *use* the app, and make great documentation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655551</id>
	<title>Re:It's about marketing</title>
	<author>gbarules2999</author>
	<datestamp>1247224620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Most people do not even know about alternatives.</p></div><p>Even if they did, installing and configuring an OS is much, much more complex than what a lot of computer users can (and should) handle.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people do not even know about alternatives.Even if they did , installing and configuring an OS is much , much more complex than what a lot of computer users can ( and should ) handle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people do not even know about alternatives.Even if they did, installing and configuring an OS is much, much more complex than what a lot of computer users can (and should) handle.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654561</id>
	<title>User Experience</title>
	<author>deadkennedy</author>
	<datestamp>1247218140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What most open source applications lack is the overall successful user experience.  The open source application may shine in all areas while lacking in some seemingly small component of the application.  But what does this tiny component matter, it is small and irrelevant.  This is what can be learned from Apple.  Nothing in the user experience can be deemed irrelevant, no matter how small.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What most open source applications lack is the overall successful user experience .
The open source application may shine in all areas while lacking in some seemingly small component of the application .
But what does this tiny component matter , it is small and irrelevant .
This is what can be learned from Apple .
Nothing in the user experience can be deemed irrelevant , no matter how small .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What most open source applications lack is the overall successful user experience.
The open source application may shine in all areas while lacking in some seemingly small component of the application.
But what does this tiny component matter, it is small and irrelevant.
This is what can be learned from Apple.
Nothing in the user experience can be deemed irrelevant, no matter how small.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653275</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>tonyreadsnews</author>
	<datestamp>1247255340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I disagree. I think most users have a pretty good idea of what they want, they just generally don't have a clue on how they want it implemented. Most users don't consider many consequences of 'what they want' thats where a developer comes in. <br> <br> For instance, a user would know that a particular interaction was clunky, or that certain data would be valuable to have at hand in a UI, but likely would have no clue (or probably care) how it was improved or how to store and generate the data. <br> <br>
Actually, users could write marketing spec, just not design specs. Most marketing specs I've seen are initially way out there, and are then revised to come in line with what is feasible in a reasonable time with the help of engineers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
I think most users have a pretty good idea of what they want , they just generally do n't have a clue on how they want it implemented .
Most users do n't consider many consequences of 'what they want ' thats where a developer comes in .
For instance , a user would know that a particular interaction was clunky , or that certain data would be valuable to have at hand in a UI , but likely would have no clue ( or probably care ) how it was improved or how to store and generate the data .
Actually , users could write marketing spec , just not design specs .
Most marketing specs I 've seen are initially way out there , and are then revised to come in line with what is feasible in a reasonable time with the help of engineers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
I think most users have a pretty good idea of what they want, they just generally don't have a clue on how they want it implemented.
Most users don't consider many consequences of 'what they want' thats where a developer comes in.
For instance, a user would know that a particular interaction was clunky, or that certain data would be valuable to have at hand in a UI, but likely would have no clue (or probably care) how it was improved or how to store and generate the data.
Actually, users could write marketing spec, just not design specs.
Most marketing specs I've seen are initially way out there, and are then revised to come in line with what is feasible in a reasonable time with the help of engineers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658539</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Waccoon</author>
	<datestamp>1247306460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It never ceases to amaze me that graphic programs usually have horrible GUIs.  GIMP has so much wasted vertical space in its GUI, which is idiotic given that widescreen monitors are so popular these days.  Why can't I get rid of tools I don't use?  Letting me get rid of whole panels isn't good enough, because I still end up with 7 panels on the screen, and use only 10\% of each one!  With all this object-oriented crap going on, why are developers still stamping widgets in one place?</p><p>Photoshop isn't much better, of course.  A horizontal bar holds all the brush defaults?  I can't lock any panels?  The brush and pencil tool are combined into one icon and I have to click-hold-select to choose between the two?  To really appeal to artists, people need to stop doing half-assed clones of Photoshop simply because it is popular, and take a few hints from projects like ArtRage II, which are truly <i>successful</i> in terms of design.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It never ceases to amaze me that graphic programs usually have horrible GUIs .
GIMP has so much wasted vertical space in its GUI , which is idiotic given that widescreen monitors are so popular these days .
Why ca n't I get rid of tools I do n't use ?
Letting me get rid of whole panels is n't good enough , because I still end up with 7 panels on the screen , and use only 10 \ % of each one !
With all this object-oriented crap going on , why are developers still stamping widgets in one place ? Photoshop is n't much better , of course .
A horizontal bar holds all the brush defaults ?
I ca n't lock any panels ?
The brush and pencil tool are combined into one icon and I have to click-hold-select to choose between the two ?
To really appeal to artists , people need to stop doing half-assed clones of Photoshop simply because it is popular , and take a few hints from projects like ArtRage II , which are truly successful in terms of design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It never ceases to amaze me that graphic programs usually have horrible GUIs.
GIMP has so much wasted vertical space in its GUI, which is idiotic given that widescreen monitors are so popular these days.
Why can't I get rid of tools I don't use?
Letting me get rid of whole panels isn't good enough, because I still end up with 7 panels on the screen, and use only 10\% of each one!
With all this object-oriented crap going on, why are developers still stamping widgets in one place?Photoshop isn't much better, of course.
A horizontal bar holds all the brush defaults?
I can't lock any panels?
The brush and pencil tool are combined into one icon and I have to click-hold-select to choose between the two?
To really appeal to artists, people need to stop doing half-assed clones of Photoshop simply because it is popular, and take a few hints from projects like ArtRage II, which are truly successful in terms of design.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656107</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653289</id>
	<title>Rebuttal quote</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"The day that I, as a nontechnical software user, can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won."</p></div><p>You just did. Feedback from users is the lifeblood of the open source movement -- not programs and data. We listen. Our email addresses and online presence is right here. We don't hide behind departments and voicemail systems with irritating prompting systems. We'll come out for a beer with you if we're close. This isn't a corporation, this is a community. Several thousand people in the open source community just read what you had to say -- and thought about it.</p><p>You think you'll ever get that, however much you pay, for commercial software?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The day that I , as a nontechnical software user , can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won .
" You just did .
Feedback from users is the lifeblood of the open source movement -- not programs and data .
We listen .
Our email addresses and online presence is right here .
We do n't hide behind departments and voicemail systems with irritating prompting systems .
We 'll come out for a beer with you if we 're close .
This is n't a corporation , this is a community .
Several thousand people in the open source community just read what you had to say -- and thought about it.You think you 'll ever get that , however much you pay , for commercial software ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The day that I, as a nontechnical software user, can meaningfully participate in an open-source project is the day that open source will truly have won.
"You just did.
Feedback from users is the lifeblood of the open source movement -- not programs and data.
We listen.
Our email addresses and online presence is right here.
We don't hide behind departments and voicemail systems with irritating prompting systems.
We'll come out for a beer with you if we're close.
This isn't a corporation, this is a community.
Several thousand people in the open source community just read what you had to say -- and thought about it.You think you'll ever get that, however much you pay, for commercial software?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28664605</id>
	<title>Re:Downside?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247320080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With that attitude, no wonder software is in such a bad state -- too many coders think they're God.</p><p>I take that back if what you meant was that it should be "The downside is that these contributors are <b> <i>only</i> </b> techies..." It takes more than techies to make great end-user software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With that attitude , no wonder software is in such a bad state -- too many coders think they 're God.I take that back if what you meant was that it should be " The downside is that these contributors are only techies... " It takes more than techies to make great end-user software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With that attitude, no wonder software is in such a bad state -- too many coders think they're God.I take that back if what you meant was that it should be "The downside is that these contributors are  only  techies..." It takes more than techies to make great end-user software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655773</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247226240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think a bit better of a way to put it:</p><p>5 out of 10 users know what they want, but can't express it in a manner that communicates it sufficiently well to achieve it.<br>4 out of 10 users haven't a clue what they want, but think they do.<br>1 out of 1 users know what they want and can express it.</p><p>And then you have the developers, who want to make something with nice nifty features, but don't want to be bothered with the polish.</p><p>This reminds me of a friend who is a senior analyist has a paper on her cube wall, I've seen two variants of the theme. It has a picture of a sports car with the caption "What the users want". This is followed by the picture of a UFO (in some variants a fighter jet) with "What the developers want to make". This is followed by "What the company is willing to spend money on" and it has some small compact car. And then finally, a picture of a really funny looking "tricked out" tricycle with the caption "What ends up being produced".</p></div><p>1 out of 1? Isn't that 100\%?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think a bit better of a way to put it : 5 out of 10 users know what they want , but ca n't express it in a manner that communicates it sufficiently well to achieve it.4 out of 10 users have n't a clue what they want , but think they do.1 out of 1 users know what they want and can express it.And then you have the developers , who want to make something with nice nifty features , but do n't want to be bothered with the polish.This reminds me of a friend who is a senior analyist has a paper on her cube wall , I 've seen two variants of the theme .
It has a picture of a sports car with the caption " What the users want " .
This is followed by the picture of a UFO ( in some variants a fighter jet ) with " What the developers want to make " .
This is followed by " What the company is willing to spend money on " and it has some small compact car .
And then finally , a picture of a really funny looking " tricked out " tricycle with the caption " What ends up being produced " .1 out of 1 ?
Is n't that 100 \ % ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think a bit better of a way to put it:5 out of 10 users know what they want, but can't express it in a manner that communicates it sufficiently well to achieve it.4 out of 10 users haven't a clue what they want, but think they do.1 out of 1 users know what they want and can express it.And then you have the developers, who want to make something with nice nifty features, but don't want to be bothered with the polish.This reminds me of a friend who is a senior analyist has a paper on her cube wall, I've seen two variants of the theme.
It has a picture of a sports car with the caption "What the users want".
This is followed by the picture of a UFO (in some variants a fighter jet) with "What the developers want to make".
This is followed by "What the company is willing to spend money on" and it has some small compact car.
And then finally, a picture of a really funny looking "tricked out" tricycle with the caption "What ends up being produced".1 out of 1?
Isn't that 100\%?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656107</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Stormwatch</author>
	<datestamp>1247228880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(posting again because somehow my other post turned out all fucked up)</p><p><i>&gt; If we live in a world where a good image manipulating application is overlooked<br>&gt; because its name is GIMP, there is something wrong with the world.</i></p><p>No, actually it is overlooked because people balk at the terrible interface and go back to Photoshop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( posting again because somehow my other post turned out all fucked up ) &gt; If we live in a world where a good image manipulating application is overlooked &gt; because its name is GIMP , there is something wrong with the world.No , actually it is overlooked because people balk at the terrible interface and go back to Photoshop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(posting again because somehow my other post turned out all fucked up)&gt; If we live in a world where a good image manipulating application is overlooked&gt; because its name is GIMP, there is something wrong with the world.No, actually it is overlooked because people balk at the terrible interface and go back to Photoshop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659253</id>
	<title>Stable</title>
	<author>pogson</author>
	<datestamp>1247320320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Stable" has two meanings:

1)features set

2)failures are rare</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Stable " has two meanings : 1 ) features set 2 ) failures are rare</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Stable" has two meanings:

1)features set

2)failures are rare</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665303</id>
	<title>Re:More whining from fashion designers</title>
	<author>Risen888</author>
	<datestamp>1247332260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you know why so much open source software sucks? It's because the programmers suck!</p><p>Granted. But do you know why so much non-free software sucks? It's because the programmers suck.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you know why so much open source software sucks ?
It 's because the programmers suck ! Granted .
But do you know why so much non-free software sucks ?
It 's because the programmers suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you know why so much open source software sucks?
It's because the programmers suck!Granted.
But do you know why so much non-free software sucks?
It's because the programmers suck.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655845</id>
	<title>Reading your msg I though "yes, YES..."</title>
	<author>Burz</author>
	<datestamp>1247226660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But then I had a big 'No friggin way' moment right at the end:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you know why so much open source software sucks? It's because the programmers suck! They don't measure themselves against any standard of excellence. They stop when something works, ignoring the fact that it doesn't work well. It's plain old slob <i>apathy.</i></p> </div><p>That wording is just far too broad a brush to use, even in this "Apple desktop" context.</p><p>If we considered the great breadth of FOSS software we'd have to conclude that excellence is a FOSS hallmark, but only for projects that have are targetting a technical or programmer user base. This is critical! It means that FOSS programmers are disconnected from non-technical users (more aptly, non-technical use cases, where fir instance Bob</p><p>Never mind, my text cursor in Ubuntu's Firefox just disappeared again and I'm tired of trying to figure out where it is for adjustments and corrections. Back to my Mac...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But then I had a big 'No friggin way ' moment right at the end : Do you know why so much open source software sucks ?
It 's because the programmers suck !
They do n't measure themselves against any standard of excellence .
They stop when something works , ignoring the fact that it does n't work well .
It 's plain old slob apathy .
That wording is just far too broad a brush to use , even in this " Apple desktop " context.If we considered the great breadth of FOSS software we 'd have to conclude that excellence is a FOSS hallmark , but only for projects that have are targetting a technical or programmer user base .
This is critical !
It means that FOSS programmers are disconnected from non-technical users ( more aptly , non-technical use cases , where fir instance BobNever mind , my text cursor in Ubuntu 's Firefox just disappeared again and I 'm tired of trying to figure out where it is for adjustments and corrections .
Back to my Mac.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But then I had a big 'No friggin way' moment right at the end:Do you know why so much open source software sucks?
It's because the programmers suck!
They don't measure themselves against any standard of excellence.
They stop when something works, ignoring the fact that it doesn't work well.
It's plain old slob apathy.
That wording is just far too broad a brush to use, even in this "Apple desktop" context.If we considered the great breadth of FOSS software we'd have to conclude that excellence is a FOSS hallmark, but only for projects that have are targetting a technical or programmer user base.
This is critical!
It means that FOSS programmers are disconnected from non-technical users (more aptly, non-technical use cases, where fir instance BobNever mind, my text cursor in Ubuntu's Firefox just disappeared again and I'm tired of trying to figure out where it is for adjustments and corrections.
Back to my Mac...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655657</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Weedhopper</author>
	<datestamp>1247225460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and 11 out of 7 statistics are just made up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and 11 out of 7 statistics are just made up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and 11 out of 7 statistics are just made up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658645</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>AmiMoJo</author>
	<datestamp>1247308140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with Mozilla software is that the core dev team seems to be completely isolated from actual users. They just change things about the UI which upsets a lot of people but which they seem to think are a good idea, without any consultation.</p><p>The new tabs in FF 3.5 are a good example. Now when you click on an external link (e.g. in your email client) it opens in the current tab, where as before it opened in a new tab or window. Now I can't just go through my emails clicking on links to read later, I have to either open a new tab manually every time or install an add-on which messes up other behaviour (Tab Mix Plus).</p><p>Thunderbird is perhaps even worse. Almost every email client ever written has customisable default mail and reply templates, but TB does not. The bug has been open for years, but the devs are against making any major changes to the template system so it will never get fixed.</p><p>Of course you get the usual "fix it yourself" reply, so I looked into it. Not on are Moz products a pain to build, but to make the changes that are needed I'd have to spend a lot of time getting to know and understand the code so I can develop a robust patch that will be accepted. In the end it boils down to spending weeks of my free time on it or just not using TB, and you can guess which I chose.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with Mozilla software is that the core dev team seems to be completely isolated from actual users .
They just change things about the UI which upsets a lot of people but which they seem to think are a good idea , without any consultation.The new tabs in FF 3.5 are a good example .
Now when you click on an external link ( e.g .
in your email client ) it opens in the current tab , where as before it opened in a new tab or window .
Now I ca n't just go through my emails clicking on links to read later , I have to either open a new tab manually every time or install an add-on which messes up other behaviour ( Tab Mix Plus ) .Thunderbird is perhaps even worse .
Almost every email client ever written has customisable default mail and reply templates , but TB does not .
The bug has been open for years , but the devs are against making any major changes to the template system so it will never get fixed.Of course you get the usual " fix it yourself " reply , so I looked into it .
Not on are Moz products a pain to build , but to make the changes that are needed I 'd have to spend a lot of time getting to know and understand the code so I can develop a robust patch that will be accepted .
In the end it boils down to spending weeks of my free time on it or just not using TB , and you can guess which I chose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with Mozilla software is that the core dev team seems to be completely isolated from actual users.
They just change things about the UI which upsets a lot of people but which they seem to think are a good idea, without any consultation.The new tabs in FF 3.5 are a good example.
Now when you click on an external link (e.g.
in your email client) it opens in the current tab, where as before it opened in a new tab or window.
Now I can't just go through my emails clicking on links to read later, I have to either open a new tab manually every time or install an add-on which messes up other behaviour (Tab Mix Plus).Thunderbird is perhaps even worse.
Almost every email client ever written has customisable default mail and reply templates, but TB does not.
The bug has been open for years, but the devs are against making any major changes to the template system so it will never get fixed.Of course you get the usual "fix it yourself" reply, so I looked into it.
Not on are Moz products a pain to build, but to make the changes that are needed I'd have to spend a lot of time getting to know and understand the code so I can develop a robust patch that will be accepted.
In the end it boils down to spending weeks of my free time on it or just not using TB, and you can guess which I chose.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659209</id>
	<title>Re:I Can Tell You This About Users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247319780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF, IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM, and, especially, The GIMP.</p></div><p>If only iKnew of brandnames that had strange prefixes or were called something generic and simple such as the 'X' box that were successful. Alas....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF , IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM , and , especially , The GIMP.If only iKnew of brandnames that had strange prefixes or were called something generic and simple such as the 'X ' box that were successful .
Alas... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF, IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM, and, especially, The GIMP.If only iKnew of brandnames that had strange prefixes or were called something generic and simple such as the 'X' box that were successful.
Alas....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655593</id>
	<title>Re:One word</title>
	<author>TheGothicGuardian</author>
	<datestamp>1247224980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a nice language and all, but I didn't know Jobs spoke it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a nice language and all , but I did n't know Jobs spoke it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a nice language and all, but I didn't know Jobs spoke it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653241</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654261</id>
	<title>Re:user analytics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247216700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life. Does this make my input useless?</p></div><p>Yes.</p><p>--A Developer</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never coded a line of C + + in my entire life .
Does this make my input useless ? Yes.--A Developer</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life.
Does this make my input useless?Yes.--A Developer
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28664591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28664539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28657885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665249
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656551
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658377
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28676109
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658599
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28692727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659253
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666817
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654957
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656551
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28674633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659079
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656387
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655119
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654557
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653649
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656915
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653347
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28664605
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28657255
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656107
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653113
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653241
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665325
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666951
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654767
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653605
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658817
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659209
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658027
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653569
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658875
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656493
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28660415
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658941
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656107
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28678633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665587
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653241
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655593
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655007
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653445
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653295
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656321
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654941
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654081
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653241
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654945
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1539206_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653241
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656467
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653289
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665325
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653303
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655129
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653347
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655111
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653931
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653197
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659079
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658817
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653119
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654557
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655845
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28664539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665303
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655315
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653209
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658875
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653595
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658599
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666817
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28696921
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658065
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654341
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28692727
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653605
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28664605
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653569
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655119
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653241
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654945
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655593
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655225
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656467
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653125
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28664591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658027
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1539206.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652575
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653029
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28660415
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653113
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653219
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654049
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666729
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656761
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658455
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656321
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654261
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658645
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654761
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28657255
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655101
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665587
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665259
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665249
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653773
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653295
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654767
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653813
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28652747
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654941
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655657
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655773
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654689
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666951
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653275
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653729
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653027
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653457
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658941
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28657885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28654465
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653649
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653161
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656387
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655465
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28655499
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28676109
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656107
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28678633
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658539
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656551
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658377
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28674633
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656915
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28656493
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659253
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28658687
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665689
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28665199
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653445
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28653853
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28666783
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1539206.28659209
</commentlist>
</conversation>
