<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_18_1136223</id>
	<title>Verizon's Challenge To the iPhone Confirmed</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1255872000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>misnohmer writes <i>"Verizon has just launched a new set of ads <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/18/AR2009101800621.html">confirming the rumors of its upcoming iPhone competitor</a>: 'Unlike previous Android phones, the Droid is rumored to be <a href="http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2009/10/01/verizon-to-announce-moto-tao-next-week-phone-to-drop-dec-1/">powered by the TI OMAP3430</a>, the same core that the iPhone and Palm Pre use, and which significantly outperforms Qualcomm 528MHz ARM11-based Android phones that exist today. Droid will also be running v.2.0 of Android, with a significantly upgraded user interface. The Droid poses a different and more significant challenge to the iPhone than any other phone to date. The Palm Pre could have been that challenger, but it lacked the Verizon network, and users were unimpressed with the hardware. According to people who've handled the device, the Droid is the most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint. When you combine that with the Verizon network, you've got something that is most definitely a challenger to the Jesus phone.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>misnohmer writes " Verizon has just launched a new set of ads confirming the rumors of its upcoming iPhone competitor : 'Unlike previous Android phones , the Droid is rumored to be powered by the TI OMAP3430 , the same core that the iPhone and Palm Pre use , and which significantly outperforms Qualcomm 528MHz ARM11-based Android phones that exist today .
Droid will also be running v.2.0 of Android , with a significantly upgraded user interface .
The Droid poses a different and more significant challenge to the iPhone than any other phone to date .
The Palm Pre could have been that challenger , but it lacked the Verizon network , and users were unimpressed with the hardware .
According to people who 've handled the device , the Droid is the most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint .
When you combine that with the Verizon network , you 've got something that is most definitely a challenger to the Jesus phone .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>misnohmer writes "Verizon has just launched a new set of ads confirming the rumors of its upcoming iPhone competitor: 'Unlike previous Android phones, the Droid is rumored to be powered by the TI OMAP3430, the same core that the iPhone and Palm Pre use, and which significantly outperforms Qualcomm 528MHz ARM11-based Android phones that exist today.
Droid will also be running v.2.0 of Android, with a significantly upgraded user interface.
The Droid poses a different and more significant challenge to the iPhone than any other phone to date.
The Palm Pre could have been that challenger, but it lacked the Verizon network, and users were unimpressed with the hardware.
According to people who've handled the device, the Droid is the most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint.
When you combine that with the Verizon network, you've got something that is most definitely a challenger to the Jesus phone.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784085</id>
	<title>Re:Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255879740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except that many phones on the market already are "IphonE killeRs". Just look at sales figures.</p><p>The comparison to "Ipod killer" is completely misleading - there, Apple are the market leader. To suggest the same applies for the Iphone is laughable, as well as showing gross ignorance of the facts. It's sad that once, Slashdot was a place to come to find people who were knowledgable about the industry. But it seems that for mobile phones, some people here know less about the market than lay people, who are out there enjoying their phones, without going "OMG I can check the Internet on my Iphone". They just do it, using a bog standard phone.</p><p>The phrase "Iphone killer" is nothing more than marketing spin. It's about as relevant as Apple referring to their new OS as a "OS/2 killer".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that many phones on the market already are " IphonE killeRs " .
Just look at sales figures.The comparison to " Ipod killer " is completely misleading - there , Apple are the market leader .
To suggest the same applies for the Iphone is laughable , as well as showing gross ignorance of the facts .
It 's sad that once , Slashdot was a place to come to find people who were knowledgable about the industry .
But it seems that for mobile phones , some people here know less about the market than lay people , who are out there enjoying their phones , without going " OMG I can check the Internet on my Iphone " .
They just do it , using a bog standard phone.The phrase " Iphone killer " is nothing more than marketing spin .
It 's about as relevant as Apple referring to their new OS as a " OS/2 killer " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that many phones on the market already are "IphonE killeRs".
Just look at sales figures.The comparison to "Ipod killer" is completely misleading - there, Apple are the market leader.
To suggest the same applies for the Iphone is laughable, as well as showing gross ignorance of the facts.
It's sad that once, Slashdot was a place to come to find people who were knowledgable about the industry.
But it seems that for mobile phones, some people here know less about the market than lay people, who are out there enjoying their phones, without going "OMG I can check the Internet on my Iphone".
They just do it, using a bog standard phone.The phrase "Iphone killer" is nothing more than marketing spin.
It's about as relevant as Apple referring to their new OS as a "OS/2 killer".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784419</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>hill180</author>
	<datestamp>1255882560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>agreed on the trying..,

They would have been better to say the following:

Pre with impressive hardware and powered by the Sprint network was a good product, but failed in the SDK, relying on WebOS which in itself is impressive, too slow for fast moving games/applications.</htmltext>
<tokenext>agreed on the trying.. , They would have been better to say the following : Pre with impressive hardware and powered by the Sprint network was a good product , but failed in the SDK , relying on WebOS which in itself is impressive , too slow for fast moving games/applications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>agreed on the trying..,

They would have been better to say the following:

Pre with impressive hardware and powered by the Sprint network was a good product, but failed in the SDK, relying on WebOS which in itself is impressive, too slow for fast moving games/applications.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788645</id>
	<title>More money in George Lucas's pocket</title>
	<author>imadork</author>
	<datestamp>1255875660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I signed up for the Verizon marketing E-mail for the Droid phone, and saw this at the bottom:
<br>DROID is a registered trademark of Lucasfilm Ltd. and its related companies. Used under license.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I signed up for the Verizon marketing E-mail for the Droid phone , and saw this at the bottom : DROID is a registered trademark of Lucasfilm Ltd. and its related companies .
Used under license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I signed up for the Verizon marketing E-mail for the Droid phone, and saw this at the bottom:
DROID is a registered trademark of Lucasfilm Ltd. and its related companies.
Used under license.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783809</id>
	<title>Re:Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>bondsbw</author>
	<datestamp>1255876920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple has managed to expand the smartphone market to people who would not have paid that much for a phone a couple of years ago.  During one of the worst recessions in American history.</p><p>Verizon might bring a better user experience than Apple has.  But, given their track record, I doubt it.  So like you alluded to, there is only a small market segment available for expensive devices that have awesome features but don't target the majority of users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple has managed to expand the smartphone market to people who would not have paid that much for a phone a couple of years ago .
During one of the worst recessions in American history.Verizon might bring a better user experience than Apple has .
But , given their track record , I doubt it .
So like you alluded to , there is only a small market segment available for expensive devices that have awesome features but do n't target the majority of users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple has managed to expand the smartphone market to people who would not have paid that much for a phone a couple of years ago.
During one of the worst recessions in American history.Verizon might bring a better user experience than Apple has.
But, given their track record, I doubt it.
So like you alluded to, there is only a small market segment available for expensive devices that have awesome features but don't target the majority of users.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785987</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255896420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you can also get unlocked phones (or unlock a phone) in the us. and just as in europe, they tend to be more expensive. Honestly, it's not much diferent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>you can also get unlocked phones ( or unlock a phone ) in the us .
and just as in europe , they tend to be more expensive .
Honestly , it 's not much diferent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you can also get unlocked phones (or unlock a phone) in the us.
and just as in europe, they tend to be more expensive.
Honestly, it's not much diferent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786279</id>
	<title>Re:What is the attraction to the iphone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255898760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Its applications were all irrelevant to me...</i> </p><p>Doesn't matter whether any apps are relevant to you.  What matters is if enough (paid for!) apps are relevant to a large enough fraction of millions of smartphone customers.  That generates critical mass between both customers and developers.</p><p>Critical mass isn't forever though.  PalmOS had it 7 or 8 years ago, and the Apple II 3 decades ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its applications were all irrelevant to me... Does n't matter whether any apps are relevant to you .
What matters is if enough ( paid for !
) apps are relevant to a large enough fraction of millions of smartphone customers .
That generates critical mass between both customers and developers.Critical mass is n't forever though .
PalmOS had it 7 or 8 years ago , and the Apple II 3 decades ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its applications were all irrelevant to me... Doesn't matter whether any apps are relevant to you.
What matters is if enough (paid for!
) apps are relevant to a large enough fraction of millions of smartphone customers.
That generates critical mass between both customers and developers.Critical mass isn't forever though.
PalmOS had it 7 or 8 years ago, and the Apple II 3 decades ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29794415</id>
	<title>Oh please.</title>
	<author>Enos Shenk</author>
	<datestamp>1255968300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Imagine if Verizon had gotten the iPhone what it would have been like. An extra $10/mo to even have the app store. A $.50 "service charge" every time you download an app. The only bluetooth that would work would be the $80 iHeadset only sold by Verizon. Oh, and the USB cable would work, but if you tried to connect to the iPhone using anything other than Verizon's pay-per-play software the phone would lock down.</p><p>A moddable hackable Verizon phone? Yeah, Ill believe that when I see it. And firmware-lock busting hacks that only<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.5\% of the population can do don't count.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine if Verizon had gotten the iPhone what it would have been like .
An extra $ 10/mo to even have the app store .
A $ .50 " service charge " every time you download an app .
The only bluetooth that would work would be the $ 80 iHeadset only sold by Verizon .
Oh , and the USB cable would work , but if you tried to connect to the iPhone using anything other than Verizon 's pay-per-play software the phone would lock down.A moddable hackable Verizon phone ?
Yeah , Ill believe that when I see it .
And firmware-lock busting hacks that only .5 \ % of the population can do do n't count .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine if Verizon had gotten the iPhone what it would have been like.
An extra $10/mo to even have the app store.
A $.50 "service charge" every time you download an app.
The only bluetooth that would work would be the $80 iHeadset only sold by Verizon.
Oh, and the USB cable would work, but if you tried to connect to the iPhone using anything other than Verizon's pay-per-play software the phone would lock down.A moddable hackable Verizon phone?
Yeah, Ill believe that when I see it.
And firmware-lock busting hacks that only .5\% of the population can do don't count.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29792923</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>korbin\_dallas</author>
	<datestamp>1255961760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Correct Sir!</p><p>The question every purchaser of the Droid should ask is:  Can I develop AND/OR load my own software on this phone and use it over your network?</p><p>$10 says Verizon will LOCK this phones apps.</p><p>Verizon HATES letting users, you know , use the phone features instead of the BILLABLE Verizon network.</p><p>Support GSM G3 and G4, and Open, Unlocked phones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Correct Sir ! The question every purchaser of the Droid should ask is : Can I develop AND/OR load my own software on this phone and use it over your network ? $ 10 says Verizon will LOCK this phones apps.Verizon HATES letting users , you know , use the phone features instead of the BILLABLE Verizon network.Support GSM G3 and G4 , and Open , Unlocked phones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correct Sir!The question every purchaser of the Droid should ask is:  Can I develop AND/OR load my own software on this phone and use it over your network?$10 says Verizon will LOCK this phones apps.Verizon HATES letting users, you know , use the phone features instead of the BILLABLE Verizon network.Support GSM G3 and G4, and Open, Unlocked phones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29787375</id>
	<title>Re:IPhone. Blah Blah Blah</title>
	<author>Brannon</author>
	<datestamp>1255863420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You, sir, are a dumb fuck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You , sir , are a dumb fuck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You, sir, are a dumb fuck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784377</id>
	<title>Missing the Big Picture</title>
	<author>ezdude</author>
	<datestamp>1255882020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The big news here is that Verizon is clearly not going to carry the iPhone anytime soon. A few months ago, Verizon and Apple were "in talks". So, what happened? That's the most interesting part about this story. You guys are burying the lead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The big news here is that Verizon is clearly not going to carry the iPhone anytime soon .
A few months ago , Verizon and Apple were " in talks " .
So , what happened ?
That 's the most interesting part about this story .
You guys are burying the lead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The big news here is that Verizon is clearly not going to carry the iPhone anytime soon.
A few months ago, Verizon and Apple were "in talks".
So, what happened?
That's the most interesting part about this story.
You guys are burying the lead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797615</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Grishnakh</author>
	<datestamp>1255981080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The USA is big, but it's not that big.  Europe is a pretty big place too, when you remember that it stretches from Ireland all the way to the Ural Mountains in Russia.  It doesn't magically stop at the Iron Curtain any more.</p><p>And if you're adding Alaska's area to the USA, that's not really valid, since I seriously doubt there's any mobile coverage in most of the state.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The USA is big , but it 's not that big .
Europe is a pretty big place too , when you remember that it stretches from Ireland all the way to the Ural Mountains in Russia .
It does n't magically stop at the Iron Curtain any more.And if you 're adding Alaska 's area to the USA , that 's not really valid , since I seriously doubt there 's any mobile coverage in most of the state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The USA is big, but it's not that big.
Europe is a pretty big place too, when you remember that it stretches from Ireland all the way to the Ural Mountains in Russia.
It doesn't magically stop at the Iron Curtain any more.And if you're adding Alaska's area to the USA, that's not really valid, since I seriously doubt there's any mobile coverage in most of the state.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29813387</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256029260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Heh. I can remember Netscape saying the same thing about IE.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Heh .
I can remember Netscape saying the same thing about IE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heh.
I can remember Netscape saying the same thing about IE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784913</id>
	<title>Re:Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1255887420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And it's worth mentioning, I think, that there is a connection between the difficulty of creating an iPod killer and creating an iPhone killer.  If you want to kill the iPhone, you have to build an iPod killer into your phone.
</p><p>You aren't going to beat the iPhone at its own game by putting in faster processors, having flashier interfaces, creating some half-assed app store.  You certainly aren't going to beat the iPhone by relying on the superiority of the Verizon Network.  What people have to remember is that when the iPhone first came out, it didn't have the App store, it didn't have any 3G capabilities at all, and it still flew off the shelves.  Why was that?
</p><p>People miss the obvious.  First, the carrier had virtually no influence on the phone, so the phone was built to service the customer and not to steer customers toward carrier services.  That's not insignificant.  But much more importantly, people were already committed time and money to using the iTunes/iPod combination, and the iPhone let them have an iPod in their smartphone.
</p><p>I know, people are going to say, "But I can play MP3's on my phone!"  Yeah, but what's the experience like?  Is the GUI as clear, sensible, and responsive as the iPhone?  What's the experience of getting that music onto your phone?  Does it sync new songs automatically?  Does it sync the metadata, including things like play-count and ratings?  Can you make smart playlists on your computer and sync those to your phone?  What online music stores are supported on your phone?  Does the carrier try to make you buy music from them for prices higher than iTunes or Amazon?  Is your phone an iPod killer?
</p><p>If people want to beat the iPhone, they shouldn't disregard the importance of the iPod in the iPhone, nor the relative ease of using iTunes.  Not only does iTunes provide a method for managing media, but it links directly into the #1 music retailer in the US.  The purchasing process couldn't be easier, and you can even buy directly from the iPod, iPhone, or AppleTV.  If you want to beat Apple, you have to beat that level of integration.
</p><p>So what you need is an online store and software that allows you to manage all your media in one place, and you need to hook that into the phone.  Then the phone itself needs to be as capable an MP3 player as the iPhone.  Only when you have all that squared away does it make sense to worry about your own app store.  Don't try to run before you can walk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And it 's worth mentioning , I think , that there is a connection between the difficulty of creating an iPod killer and creating an iPhone killer .
If you want to kill the iPhone , you have to build an iPod killer into your phone .
You are n't going to beat the iPhone at its own game by putting in faster processors , having flashier interfaces , creating some half-assed app store .
You certainly are n't going to beat the iPhone by relying on the superiority of the Verizon Network .
What people have to remember is that when the iPhone first came out , it did n't have the App store , it did n't have any 3G capabilities at all , and it still flew off the shelves .
Why was that ?
People miss the obvious .
First , the carrier had virtually no influence on the phone , so the phone was built to service the customer and not to steer customers toward carrier services .
That 's not insignificant .
But much more importantly , people were already committed time and money to using the iTunes/iPod combination , and the iPhone let them have an iPod in their smartphone .
I know , people are going to say , " But I can play MP3 's on my phone !
" Yeah , but what 's the experience like ?
Is the GUI as clear , sensible , and responsive as the iPhone ?
What 's the experience of getting that music onto your phone ?
Does it sync new songs automatically ?
Does it sync the metadata , including things like play-count and ratings ?
Can you make smart playlists on your computer and sync those to your phone ?
What online music stores are supported on your phone ?
Does the carrier try to make you buy music from them for prices higher than iTunes or Amazon ?
Is your phone an iPod killer ?
If people want to beat the iPhone , they should n't disregard the importance of the iPod in the iPhone , nor the relative ease of using iTunes .
Not only does iTunes provide a method for managing media , but it links directly into the # 1 music retailer in the US .
The purchasing process could n't be easier , and you can even buy directly from the iPod , iPhone , or AppleTV .
If you want to beat Apple , you have to beat that level of integration .
So what you need is an online store and software that allows you to manage all your media in one place , and you need to hook that into the phone .
Then the phone itself needs to be as capable an MP3 player as the iPhone .
Only when you have all that squared away does it make sense to worry about your own app store .
Do n't try to run before you can walk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And it's worth mentioning, I think, that there is a connection between the difficulty of creating an iPod killer and creating an iPhone killer.
If you want to kill the iPhone, you have to build an iPod killer into your phone.
You aren't going to beat the iPhone at its own game by putting in faster processors, having flashier interfaces, creating some half-assed app store.
You certainly aren't going to beat the iPhone by relying on the superiority of the Verizon Network.
What people have to remember is that when the iPhone first came out, it didn't have the App store, it didn't have any 3G capabilities at all, and it still flew off the shelves.
Why was that?
People miss the obvious.
First, the carrier had virtually no influence on the phone, so the phone was built to service the customer and not to steer customers toward carrier services.
That's not insignificant.
But much more importantly, people were already committed time and money to using the iTunes/iPod combination, and the iPhone let them have an iPod in their smartphone.
I know, people are going to say, "But I can play MP3's on my phone!
"  Yeah, but what's the experience like?
Is the GUI as clear, sensible, and responsive as the iPhone?
What's the experience of getting that music onto your phone?
Does it sync new songs automatically?
Does it sync the metadata, including things like play-count and ratings?
Can you make smart playlists on your computer and sync those to your phone?
What online music stores are supported on your phone?
Does the carrier try to make you buy music from them for prices higher than iTunes or Amazon?
Is your phone an iPod killer?
If people want to beat the iPhone, they shouldn't disregard the importance of the iPod in the iPhone, nor the relative ease of using iTunes.
Not only does iTunes provide a method for managing media, but it links directly into the #1 music retailer in the US.
The purchasing process couldn't be easier, and you can even buy directly from the iPod, iPhone, or AppleTV.
If you want to beat Apple, you have to beat that level of integration.
So what you need is an online store and software that allows you to manage all your media in one place, and you need to hook that into the phone.
Then the phone itself needs to be as capable an MP3 player as the iPhone.
Only when you have all that squared away does it make sense to worry about your own app store.
Don't try to run before you can walk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784475</id>
	<title>Re:But</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255883220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The best way to challenge the iPhone is to not bill your phone as "the iPhone killer". Just let the phone do what it does best and people will eventually notice.</p></div><p>The Macintosh community has been hyping Macs as the "IBM PC killer" since 1996, yet none of that is in the horizon. This is a botched strategy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The best way to challenge the iPhone is to not bill your phone as " the iPhone killer " .
Just let the phone do what it does best and people will eventually notice.The Macintosh community has been hyping Macs as the " IBM PC killer " since 1996 , yet none of that is in the horizon .
This is a botched strategy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best way to challenge the iPhone is to not bill your phone as "the iPhone killer".
Just let the phone do what it does best and people will eventually notice.The Macintosh community has been hyping Macs as the "IBM PC killer" since 1996, yet none of that is in the horizon.
This is a botched strategy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784559</id>
	<title>Re:IPhone. Blah Blah Blah</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1255884000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Only the first two have anything to do with a phone.  The rest are add on that move a phone to a multimedia device. Kids and some parents will miss many of these features, but many just wanted email and web browsing.  BTW, there was only a year when the iPhone did not have mp3 ringtones.  Again, a feature only a few annoying people would consider critical.
<p>
For years only few phones had good email and browsing. The iPhone was great because it did, and was also integrated, from day one, to the then emerging cloud via google and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mac.  It was also integrated to iTunes, and not dependent on cell company music services.  For some this is a plus, as it makes it easy to rip tracks and put it on the phone.
</p><p>
But you are correct. There are many phones that some thinks surpass the iPhone, and those people should absolutely buy those phones.  No one says that everyone should have an iPhone.  All that happens is that people complain that the iPhone does not do everything.  But we live in a competitive market place and the iPhone can do it's thing, and the others can do their thing.  What is to be seen is whether Verizon, with the clearly superior network in the US, can put out a better integrated product than Apple.
</p><p>
What also remains to be seen is if data integrity can be assured with these other services.  I have never lost data because Apple servers went bust.  True, I pay extra for the service, but I think that others are going to consider the data retention service as part of the monthly fees, especially if using Android or MS Windows Mobile.Both MS and Google has recently caused data loss for at least some customer. Not a very good start for their cloud computing strategy.Perhaps they don't care about data retention, since these devices are mostly considered toys, and that is why they include such critial features such as MP3 ringtones and A2DP.  That will leave Blackberry and iPhone for those that just need to get work done, so we can go and play in the real world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only the first two have anything to do with a phone .
The rest are add on that move a phone to a multimedia device .
Kids and some parents will miss many of these features , but many just wanted email and web browsing .
BTW , there was only a year when the iPhone did not have mp3 ringtones .
Again , a feature only a few annoying people would consider critical .
For years only few phones had good email and browsing .
The iPhone was great because it did , and was also integrated , from day one , to the then emerging cloud via google and .mac .
It was also integrated to iTunes , and not dependent on cell company music services .
For some this is a plus , as it makes it easy to rip tracks and put it on the phone .
But you are correct .
There are many phones that some thinks surpass the iPhone , and those people should absolutely buy those phones .
No one says that everyone should have an iPhone .
All that happens is that people complain that the iPhone does not do everything .
But we live in a competitive market place and the iPhone can do it 's thing , and the others can do their thing .
What is to be seen is whether Verizon , with the clearly superior network in the US , can put out a better integrated product than Apple .
What also remains to be seen is if data integrity can be assured with these other services .
I have never lost data because Apple servers went bust .
True , I pay extra for the service , but I think that others are going to consider the data retention service as part of the monthly fees , especially if using Android or MS Windows Mobile.Both MS and Google has recently caused data loss for at least some customer .
Not a very good start for their cloud computing strategy.Perhaps they do n't care about data retention , since these devices are mostly considered toys , and that is why they include such critial features such as MP3 ringtones and A2DP .
That will leave Blackberry and iPhone for those that just need to get work done , so we can go and play in the real world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only the first two have anything to do with a phone.
The rest are add on that move a phone to a multimedia device.
Kids and some parents will miss many of these features, but many just wanted email and web browsing.
BTW, there was only a year when the iPhone did not have mp3 ringtones.
Again, a feature only a few annoying people would consider critical.
For years only few phones had good email and browsing.
The iPhone was great because it did, and was also integrated, from day one, to the then emerging cloud via google and .mac.
It was also integrated to iTunes, and not dependent on cell company music services.
For some this is a plus, as it makes it easy to rip tracks and put it on the phone.
But you are correct.
There are many phones that some thinks surpass the iPhone, and those people should absolutely buy those phones.
No one says that everyone should have an iPhone.
All that happens is that people complain that the iPhone does not do everything.
But we live in a competitive market place and the iPhone can do it's thing, and the others can do their thing.
What is to be seen is whether Verizon, with the clearly superior network in the US, can put out a better integrated product than Apple.
What also remains to be seen is if data integrity can be assured with these other services.
I have never lost data because Apple servers went bust.
True, I pay extra for the service, but I think that others are going to consider the data retention service as part of the monthly fees, especially if using Android or MS Windows Mobile.Both MS and Google has recently caused data loss for at least some customer.
Not a very good start for their cloud computing strategy.Perhaps they don't care about data retention, since these devices are mostly considered toys, and that is why they include such critial features such as MP3 ringtones and A2DP.
That will leave Blackberry and iPhone for those that just need to get work done, so we can go and play in the real world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784107</id>
	<title>Re:But</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255879860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree. I can understand the temptation, since the RDF is so great that simply adding a reference to the almighty Jesus phone will get you free advertising. But it's depressing, as by doing so, they're just giving free advertising to Apple (which they desperately need, since they're still getting canned by Nokia etc).</p><p>But hey, I guess I'm just not cool enough to be an Apple user.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
I can understand the temptation , since the RDF is so great that simply adding a reference to the almighty Jesus phone will get you free advertising .
But it 's depressing , as by doing so , they 're just giving free advertising to Apple ( which they desperately need , since they 're still getting canned by Nokia etc ) .But hey , I guess I 'm just not cool enough to be an Apple user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
I can understand the temptation, since the RDF is so great that simply adding a reference to the almighty Jesus phone will get you free advertising.
But it's depressing, as by doing so, they're just giving free advertising to Apple (which they desperately need, since they're still getting canned by Nokia etc).But hey, I guess I'm just not cool enough to be an Apple user.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786469</id>
	<title>Re:most sophisticated mobile device?</title>
	<author>LurkerXXX</author>
	<datestamp>1255857120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought the N900 was going to be T-Mobile only in the U.S.  Is that incorrect?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the N900 was going to be T-Mobile only in the U.S. Is that incorrect ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the N900 was going to be T-Mobile only in the U.S.  Is that incorrect?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784989</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Bobartig</author>
	<datestamp>1255888320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like astroturfing to me. I've never heard of ANYONE complaining about the Pre due to its network.</p><p>And, you are completely correct. You can hate the phone; you can hate the network. But, you can't hate the phone because of the network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like astroturfing to me .
I 've never heard of ANYONE complaining about the Pre due to its network.And , you are completely correct .
You can hate the phone ; you can hate the network .
But , you ca n't hate the phone because of the network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like astroturfing to me.
I've never heard of ANYONE complaining about the Pre due to its network.And, you are completely correct.
You can hate the phone; you can hate the network.
But, you can't hate the phone because of the network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784189</id>
	<title>Hardware, schmardware, is it pleasant to use?</title>
	<author>dpbsmith</author>
	<datestamp>1255880460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"According to people who've handled the device, the Droid is the most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint. When you combine that with the Verizon network, you've got something that is most definitely a challenger to the Jesus phone.'"</p><p>Oh? When I hear that "according to people who've handled the device, the Droid is the most comfortable, pleasant-to-use device to hit the market to date," then I'll pay attention.</p><p>I don't really know how Apple does it. Their UI and usability aren't all THAT great, yet they consistently manage to turn out stuff that really is usable. Maybe the mystery is how everyone else manages to screw it up. With the average gadget, it takes about ten minutes before you come across something so inexplicably, bafflingly sucky that you just can't figure out how it ever could have gotten out the door. Of course, I've worked in a company where the CEO dictated UI decisions and, unfortunately, had \_bad\_ taste. And I've also worked in a big company where the marketers simply would put down "ease of use" as a bullet point, and from that point on everyone just assumed the product had it because it was on the list.</p><p>I still can't figure out what Apple did that made iTunes the first viable online music store, or made the App Store the first viable software store for smart phones. It seems as if all they did was to avoid gross stupidity. That must be a lot harder to do than you'd think.</p><p>Afterthought: It occurs to me that one area in which vendors do get the usability consistently right, or at least "good enough," are digital cameras. I wonder why digital cameras are easy, or at least POSSIBLE to use, and cell phones aren't? I notice that digital camera makers do seem to be willing to spend a few extra cents to give the controls different shapes and turn in different directions, instead of confronting you with a uniform sea of buttons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" According to people who 've handled the device , the Droid is the most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint .
When you combine that with the Verizon network , you 've got something that is most definitely a challenger to the Jesus phone. ' " Oh ?
When I hear that " according to people who 've handled the device , the Droid is the most comfortable , pleasant-to-use device to hit the market to date , " then I 'll pay attention.I do n't really know how Apple does it .
Their UI and usability are n't all THAT great , yet they consistently manage to turn out stuff that really is usable .
Maybe the mystery is how everyone else manages to screw it up .
With the average gadget , it takes about ten minutes before you come across something so inexplicably , bafflingly sucky that you just ca n't figure out how it ever could have gotten out the door .
Of course , I 've worked in a company where the CEO dictated UI decisions and , unfortunately , had \ _bad \ _ taste .
And I 've also worked in a big company where the marketers simply would put down " ease of use " as a bullet point , and from that point on everyone just assumed the product had it because it was on the list.I still ca n't figure out what Apple did that made iTunes the first viable online music store , or made the App Store the first viable software store for smart phones .
It seems as if all they did was to avoid gross stupidity .
That must be a lot harder to do than you 'd think.Afterthought : It occurs to me that one area in which vendors do get the usability consistently right , or at least " good enough , " are digital cameras .
I wonder why digital cameras are easy , or at least POSSIBLE to use , and cell phones are n't ?
I notice that digital camera makers do seem to be willing to spend a few extra cents to give the controls different shapes and turn in different directions , instead of confronting you with a uniform sea of buttons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"According to people who've handled the device, the Droid is the most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint.
When you combine that with the Verizon network, you've got something that is most definitely a challenger to the Jesus phone.'"Oh?
When I hear that "according to people who've handled the device, the Droid is the most comfortable, pleasant-to-use device to hit the market to date," then I'll pay attention.I don't really know how Apple does it.
Their UI and usability aren't all THAT great, yet they consistently manage to turn out stuff that really is usable.
Maybe the mystery is how everyone else manages to screw it up.
With the average gadget, it takes about ten minutes before you come across something so inexplicably, bafflingly sucky that you just can't figure out how it ever could have gotten out the door.
Of course, I've worked in a company where the CEO dictated UI decisions and, unfortunately, had \_bad\_ taste.
And I've also worked in a big company where the marketers simply would put down "ease of use" as a bullet point, and from that point on everyone just assumed the product had it because it was on the list.I still can't figure out what Apple did that made iTunes the first viable online music store, or made the App Store the first viable software store for smart phones.
It seems as if all they did was to avoid gross stupidity.
That must be a lot harder to do than you'd think.Afterthought: It occurs to me that one area in which vendors do get the usability consistently right, or at least "good enough," are digital cameras.
I wonder why digital cameras are easy, or at least POSSIBLE to use, and cell phones aren't?
I notice that digital camera makers do seem to be willing to spend a few extra cents to give the controls different shapes and turn in different directions, instead of confronting you with a uniform sea of buttons.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785697</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255894380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was a Sprint customer since 2001, and seriously considered getting the Palm Pre.  I played around with it for about 20 minutes in the Sprint store, and then talked to the salesman about it.  What I wanted was to get my girlfriend on a family plan with me, and I wanted the Pre.  She just wanted a free phone that could do some simple SMS messaging.  She did not have any use for a data plan, smart phone, etc...  But Sprint requires that on a family plan, if one phone has data, they all have to.  That's another $25/mo for something that she did not need!</p><p>I told them that AT&amp;T would let me get an iPhone with a data plan and another phone without data, and on the same family plan.  The salesman said that with Sprint, that is the requirement.  I told him that's fine with me, I'm going to AT&amp;T.  I switched to AT&amp;T and got an iPhone, and haven't looked back.  Sprint is the one screwing themselves and their partners (Palm) here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was a Sprint customer since 2001 , and seriously considered getting the Palm Pre .
I played around with it for about 20 minutes in the Sprint store , and then talked to the salesman about it .
What I wanted was to get my girlfriend on a family plan with me , and I wanted the Pre .
She just wanted a free phone that could do some simple SMS messaging .
She did not have any use for a data plan , smart phone , etc... But Sprint requires that on a family plan , if one phone has data , they all have to .
That 's another $ 25/mo for something that she did not need ! I told them that AT&amp;T would let me get an iPhone with a data plan and another phone without data , and on the same family plan .
The salesman said that with Sprint , that is the requirement .
I told him that 's fine with me , I 'm going to AT&amp;T .
I switched to AT&amp;T and got an iPhone , and have n't looked back .
Sprint is the one screwing themselves and their partners ( Palm ) here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was a Sprint customer since 2001, and seriously considered getting the Palm Pre.
I played around with it for about 20 minutes in the Sprint store, and then talked to the salesman about it.
What I wanted was to get my girlfriend on a family plan with me, and I wanted the Pre.
She just wanted a free phone that could do some simple SMS messaging.
She did not have any use for a data plan, smart phone, etc...  But Sprint requires that on a family plan, if one phone has data, they all have to.
That's another $25/mo for something that she did not need!I told them that AT&amp;T would let me get an iPhone with a data plan and another phone without data, and on the same family plan.
The salesman said that with Sprint, that is the requirement.
I told him that's fine with me, I'm going to AT&amp;T.
I switched to AT&amp;T and got an iPhone, and haven't looked back.
Sprint is the one screwing themselves and their partners (Palm) here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29787341</id>
	<title>Re:IPhone. Blah Blah Blah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255863240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never heard anyone other than apple-haters care about the things you listed there.  Why don't you throw in "no fm radio" too while you're at it?  It's among the many things no one really wants or gives a shit about in their phones.  How about a large screen with a good interface and full-featured web browser?  Apple is STILL the only one making a phone with that, and it's the one thing people actually care about and use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never heard anyone other than apple-haters care about the things you listed there .
Why do n't you throw in " no fm radio " too while you 're at it ?
It 's among the many things no one really wants or gives a shit about in their phones .
How about a large screen with a good interface and full-featured web browser ?
Apple is STILL the only one making a phone with that , and it 's the one thing people actually care about and use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never heard anyone other than apple-haters care about the things you listed there.
Why don't you throw in "no fm radio" too while you're at it?
It's among the many things no one really wants or gives a shit about in their phones.
How about a large screen with a good interface and full-featured web browser?
Apple is STILL the only one making a phone with that, and it's the one thing people actually care about and use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786481</id>
	<title>Re:Show Me a Sign</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255857120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>your whore of a wife asked me to let you know that not only did you spell her domain incorrectly, you are definitely not the master of anything.</htmltext>
<tokenext>your whore of a wife asked me to let you know that not only did you spell her domain incorrectly , you are definitely not the master of anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>your whore of a wife asked me to let you know that not only did you spell her domain incorrectly, you are definitely not the master of anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29803895</id>
	<title>Re:Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>SetupWeasel</author>
	<datestamp>1255970880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a phone to be a huge success, it does not have to match the sales of the iPhone, but if you get 4 or 5 phones that get more than a quarter of the users of the iPhone, Android is suddenly winning.</p><p>I didn't say it was inevitable, but if you look at the plans of attack of the two companies, The iPhone is monolithic and rigid and Android is numerous and flexible. Google is playing a game of numbers that Apple has refused to play for the last 30 years. It will be interesting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a phone to be a huge success , it does not have to match the sales of the iPhone , but if you get 4 or 5 phones that get more than a quarter of the users of the iPhone , Android is suddenly winning.I did n't say it was inevitable , but if you look at the plans of attack of the two companies , The iPhone is monolithic and rigid and Android is numerous and flexible .
Google is playing a game of numbers that Apple has refused to play for the last 30 years .
It will be interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a phone to be a huge success, it does not have to match the sales of the iPhone, but if you get 4 or 5 phones that get more than a quarter of the users of the iPhone, Android is suddenly winning.I didn't say it was inevitable, but if you look at the plans of attack of the two companies, The iPhone is monolithic and rigid and Android is numerous and flexible.
Google is playing a game of numbers that Apple has refused to play for the last 30 years.
It will be interesting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29790989</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785241</id>
	<title>Re:Um...US != world</title>
	<author>JSBiff</author>
	<datestamp>1255890300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, that's true. But, if you are in America, your choices have been somewhat limited - there's actually been, I think, greater availability of Android handsets *outside* the U.S. than inside the U.S. until recently. For about the past year, if you wanted an Android phone, you had to use T-Mobile, basically. T-Mo is alright, but they are, I think, the 4th largest network in the US, with Sprint, AT&amp;T and Verizon ahead of them. That means that something like 75\% of U.S. mobile customers didn't have the option of using an Android handset unless they wanted to switch networks (and people are often hesitant to switch to another network, particularly a smaller network like T-Mo, because they might not get the same coverage they did with the larger network (particularly true if you are outside a major Metro area - but even inside large metros, there can be 'weak spots' and 'dead spots').</p><p>
&nbsp; I'm not sure about the relative sizes of the Sprint, AT&amp;T, and Verizon networks, but I *think*, in terms of the actual coverage provided by the networks, Verizon is the largest. Sprint just recently announced the HTC Hero which is an Android phone, and now Verizon has the Droid, which means that all the nationals except AT&amp;T have an Android phone, which means that there is a much greater potential market for Android, which means maybe the platform *might* have a chance to succeed, because it's now on 3 networks, with the iPhone only on 1 network. Being available on Verizon, at least in the U.S., really is a *big* deal, and may have impact on the rest of the world, as the platforms's success or failure in the U.S. could strongly impact the phone availability in other countries, long term.  That is, if it fails in the U.S., unless it was *huge* everywhere else, the Android phones would likely go off the market, everywhere, in another couple years or so - I mean, I could be wrong, but basic economics theory would seem to suggest that manufacturer's, while necessarily having some different choices/options, probably want to keep the number of models they produce at, relatively speaking, the minimum they can sustain, so that they can benefit from economies of scale.<br>).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , that 's true .
But , if you are in America , your choices have been somewhat limited - there 's actually been , I think , greater availability of Android handsets * outside * the U.S. than inside the U.S. until recently .
For about the past year , if you wanted an Android phone , you had to use T-Mobile , basically .
T-Mo is alright , but they are , I think , the 4th largest network in the US , with Sprint , AT&amp;T and Verizon ahead of them .
That means that something like 75 \ % of U.S. mobile customers did n't have the option of using an Android handset unless they wanted to switch networks ( and people are often hesitant to switch to another network , particularly a smaller network like T-Mo , because they might not get the same coverage they did with the larger network ( particularly true if you are outside a major Metro area - but even inside large metros , there can be 'weak spots ' and 'dead spots ' ) .
  I 'm not sure about the relative sizes of the Sprint , AT&amp;T , and Verizon networks , but I * think * , in terms of the actual coverage provided by the networks , Verizon is the largest .
Sprint just recently announced the HTC Hero which is an Android phone , and now Verizon has the Droid , which means that all the nationals except AT&amp;T have an Android phone , which means that there is a much greater potential market for Android , which means maybe the platform * might * have a chance to succeed , because it 's now on 3 networks , with the iPhone only on 1 network .
Being available on Verizon , at least in the U.S. , really is a * big * deal , and may have impact on the rest of the world , as the platforms 's success or failure in the U.S. could strongly impact the phone availability in other countries , long term .
That is , if it fails in the U.S. , unless it was * huge * everywhere else , the Android phones would likely go off the market , everywhere , in another couple years or so - I mean , I could be wrong , but basic economics theory would seem to suggest that manufacturer 's , while necessarily having some different choices/options , probably want to keep the number of models they produce at , relatively speaking , the minimum they can sustain , so that they can benefit from economies of scale .
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, that's true.
But, if you are in America, your choices have been somewhat limited - there's actually been, I think, greater availability of Android handsets *outside* the U.S. than inside the U.S. until recently.
For about the past year, if you wanted an Android phone, you had to use T-Mobile, basically.
T-Mo is alright, but they are, I think, the 4th largest network in the US, with Sprint, AT&amp;T and Verizon ahead of them.
That means that something like 75\% of U.S. mobile customers didn't have the option of using an Android handset unless they wanted to switch networks (and people are often hesitant to switch to another network, particularly a smaller network like T-Mo, because they might not get the same coverage they did with the larger network (particularly true if you are outside a major Metro area - but even inside large metros, there can be 'weak spots' and 'dead spots').
  I'm not sure about the relative sizes of the Sprint, AT&amp;T, and Verizon networks, but I *think*, in terms of the actual coverage provided by the networks, Verizon is the largest.
Sprint just recently announced the HTC Hero which is an Android phone, and now Verizon has the Droid, which means that all the nationals except AT&amp;T have an Android phone, which means that there is a much greater potential market for Android, which means maybe the platform *might* have a chance to succeed, because it's now on 3 networks, with the iPhone only on 1 network.
Being available on Verizon, at least in the U.S., really is a *big* deal, and may have impact on the rest of the world, as the platforms's success or failure in the U.S. could strongly impact the phone availability in other countries, long term.
That is, if it fails in the U.S., unless it was *huge* everywhere else, the Android phones would likely go off the market, everywhere, in another couple years or so - I mean, I could be wrong, but basic economics theory would seem to suggest that manufacturer's, while necessarily having some different choices/options, probably want to keep the number of models they produce at, relatively speaking, the minimum they can sustain, so that they can benefit from economies of scale.
).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784191</id>
	<title>Re:why aren't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @720M</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1255880460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because the OMAP3430 has been on the market for a long time, is well supported by software and is cheaper than the OMAP35 series.  If you want a device now, the OMAP3430 is a good choice.  If you want a device in six months then the OMAP4 series is probably a better choice.  The OMAP3530 doesn't really have any compelling features over the 3430 (same GPU, same DSP, marginally faster ARM core) and is more expensive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the OMAP3430 has been on the market for a long time , is well supported by software and is cheaper than the OMAP35 series .
If you want a device now , the OMAP3430 is a good choice .
If you want a device in six months then the OMAP4 series is probably a better choice .
The OMAP3530 does n't really have any compelling features over the 3430 ( same GPU , same DSP , marginally faster ARM core ) and is more expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the OMAP3430 has been on the market for a long time, is well supported by software and is cheaper than the OMAP35 series.
If you want a device now, the OMAP3430 is a good choice.
If you want a device in six months then the OMAP4 series is probably a better choice.
The OMAP3530 doesn't really have any compelling features over the 3430 (same GPU, same DSP, marginally faster ARM core) and is more expensive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783777</id>
	<title>Re:Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255876620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "killer" is that the Verizon is clearly not going to be selling the iPhone any time soon. As long as the iPhone remains solely on the AT&amp;T network, it's going to kill itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " killer " is that the Verizon is clearly not going to be selling the iPhone any time soon .
As long as the iPhone remains solely on the AT&amp;T network , it 's going to kill itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "killer" is that the Verizon is clearly not going to be selling the iPhone any time soon.
As long as the iPhone remains solely on the AT&amp;T network, it's going to kill itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783763</id>
	<title>Jumping the gun</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255876560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think some one needs to wound the iPhone before some one can claim to be an iPhone killer. It's the same BS of who ever is on top must be knocked off! Next it'll be the Android killer. The one ups man ship is silly. Gee can't one be better suited to a given person than another? Do we all really have the same exact needs and the new phone nails our specific clonelike needs?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think some one needs to wound the iPhone before some one can claim to be an iPhone killer .
It 's the same BS of who ever is on top must be knocked off !
Next it 'll be the Android killer .
The one ups man ship is silly .
Gee ca n't one be better suited to a given person than another ?
Do we all really have the same exact needs and the new phone nails our specific clonelike needs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think some one needs to wound the iPhone before some one can claim to be an iPhone killer.
It's the same BS of who ever is on top must be knocked off!
Next it'll be the Android killer.
The one ups man ship is silly.
Gee can't one be better suited to a given person than another?
Do we all really have the same exact needs and the new phone nails our specific clonelike needs?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29790989</id>
	<title>Re:Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1255983180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is only a matter of time before a blockbuster Android phone comes out because any company can make one for any network.</p> </div><p>Anybody could have come out with a blockbuster iPod competitor, because music players don't even require any network or carrier. But nobody ever did. So why is it inevitable in the phone market?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is only a matter of time before a blockbuster Android phone comes out because any company can make one for any network .
Anybody could have come out with a blockbuster iPod competitor , because music players do n't even require any network or carrier .
But nobody ever did .
So why is it inevitable in the phone market ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is only a matter of time before a blockbuster Android phone comes out because any company can make one for any network.
Anybody could have come out with a blockbuster iPod competitor, because music players don't even require any network or carrier.
But nobody ever did.
So why is it inevitable in the phone market?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784317</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786861</id>
	<title>Re:The problem was never with their network</title>
	<author>Fishbulb</author>
	<datestamp>1255859760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amen.  I've been on Verizon since 2002 and have been through several low-end phones.  Each one has been utterly crippled by Verizon before getting into my hands - having to go through their network (and therefore needing a data plan) just to download the photos you take, or upload ringtones, not being able to use a recorded message as a ringtone (I want my sweetie's ringtone to be her voice - I should be able to record that and use it! but noooooo), or otherwise needing to buy their $50 dollar cable which changes with every new phone so that the connectors are not backward/forward compatible.</p><p>It's a horrible, horrible misuse of what could be cool tech.</p><p>I have ZERO confidence that Verizon will allow this phone to actually be the "iPhone killer" they're trumping it up to be.  "Whoa, wait! If we let it do <i>that</i>, we won't be able to squeeze customers of every dime!"</p><p>Yawn.</p><p>* - yeah, I know BitPim will let you do all this.  The fact is that BitPim exists because cell carriers are pricks about crippling phones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen .
I 've been on Verizon since 2002 and have been through several low-end phones .
Each one has been utterly crippled by Verizon before getting into my hands - having to go through their network ( and therefore needing a data plan ) just to download the photos you take , or upload ringtones , not being able to use a recorded message as a ringtone ( I want my sweetie 's ringtone to be her voice - I should be able to record that and use it !
but noooooo ) , or otherwise needing to buy their $ 50 dollar cable which changes with every new phone so that the connectors are not backward/forward compatible.It 's a horrible , horrible misuse of what could be cool tech.I have ZERO confidence that Verizon will allow this phone to actually be the " iPhone killer " they 're trumping it up to be .
" Whoa , wait !
If we let it do that , we wo n't be able to squeeze customers of every dime ! " Yawn .
* - yeah , I know BitPim will let you do all this .
The fact is that BitPim exists because cell carriers are pricks about crippling phones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen.
I've been on Verizon since 2002 and have been through several low-end phones.
Each one has been utterly crippled by Verizon before getting into my hands - having to go through their network (and therefore needing a data plan) just to download the photos you take, or upload ringtones, not being able to use a recorded message as a ringtone (I want my sweetie's ringtone to be her voice - I should be able to record that and use it!
but noooooo), or otherwise needing to buy their $50 dollar cable which changes with every new phone so that the connectors are not backward/forward compatible.It's a horrible, horrible misuse of what could be cool tech.I have ZERO confidence that Verizon will allow this phone to actually be the "iPhone killer" they're trumping it up to be.
"Whoa, wait!
If we let it do that, we won't be able to squeeze customers of every dime!"Yawn.
* - yeah, I know BitPim will let you do all this.
The fact is that BitPim exists because cell carriers are pricks about crippling phones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783765</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785371</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1255891740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Every other network in the USA is so bad that a device has to be on <b>the best one</b> to succeed</p></div><p>Maybe every other network isn't completely terrible, but Verizon does appear to currently be the best network.  Look through the cities listed on this page:</p><p><a href="http://www.cellreception.com/coverage/" title="cellreception.com">http://www.cellreception.com/coverage/</a> [cellreception.com]</p><p>Even though that's not exactly scientific, there's a clear pattern from across the country of Verizon getting high user ratings.  Verizon is nearly always higher than AT&amp;T, for example.  Sprint and T-Mobile occasionally fight for the top spot, and Nextel clearly has smaller targeted markets.</p><p>Apparently Sprint exclusively has the Pre "through 2009".  Sprint shows up decently well on that reception site, but it's lacking in a lot of places.</p><p>I would also say that any single carrier is currently not capable of supporting everything that its users would really want to do on their phones.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every other network in the USA is so bad that a device has to be on the best one to succeedMaybe every other network is n't completely terrible , but Verizon does appear to currently be the best network .
Look through the cities listed on this page : http : //www.cellreception.com/coverage/ [ cellreception.com ] Even though that 's not exactly scientific , there 's a clear pattern from across the country of Verizon getting high user ratings .
Verizon is nearly always higher than AT&amp;T , for example .
Sprint and T-Mobile occasionally fight for the top spot , and Nextel clearly has smaller targeted markets.Apparently Sprint exclusively has the Pre " through 2009 " .
Sprint shows up decently well on that reception site , but it 's lacking in a lot of places.I would also say that any single carrier is currently not capable of supporting everything that its users would really want to do on their phones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every other network in the USA is so bad that a device has to be on the best one to succeedMaybe every other network isn't completely terrible, but Verizon does appear to currently be the best network.
Look through the cities listed on this page:http://www.cellreception.com/coverage/ [cellreception.com]Even though that's not exactly scientific, there's a clear pattern from across the country of Verizon getting high user ratings.
Verizon is nearly always higher than AT&amp;T, for example.
Sprint and T-Mobile occasionally fight for the top spot, and Nextel clearly has smaller targeted markets.Apparently Sprint exclusively has the Pre "through 2009".
Sprint shows up decently well on that reception site, but it's lacking in a lot of places.I would also say that any single carrier is currently not capable of supporting everything that its users would really want to do on their phones.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784361</id>
	<title>Re:What is the attraction to the iphone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255881900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a pocket computer junkie.  I had a sharp pocket computer and an HP 15C in high school, a series of HP calculators through university, a Newton, and have switched back and forth between Palm, PocketPC/WM, through their upgrades and leapfrogging of each other over the years.  And I'm a "technical" user, too.  The last handheld I used consistently was a Sharp Zaurus with OpenBSD on it. Command-line heaven.  Other than that old 15C, NOTHING I have had compares with my iPhone 3G even slightly.  The attraction?</p><p>It does what I want.  It does it with no fuss.  The interface is very very consistent.  It very very rarely crashes.  I don't have to figure it out because it does things the way I intuitively think it should.  The technology gets out of my way and I get to just do stuff.</p><p>Yes, the interface is beautiful and that DOES make it easier to use.  That's not a new idea ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetics ).  More specifically, the iPhone UI has the best union of form and function I have ever seen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a pocket computer junkie .
I had a sharp pocket computer and an HP 15C in high school , a series of HP calculators through university , a Newton , and have switched back and forth between Palm , PocketPC/WM , through their upgrades and leapfrogging of each other over the years .
And I 'm a " technical " user , too .
The last handheld I used consistently was a Sharp Zaurus with OpenBSD on it .
Command-line heaven .
Other than that old 15C , NOTHING I have had compares with my iPhone 3G even slightly .
The attraction ? It does what I want .
It does it with no fuss .
The interface is very very consistent .
It very very rarely crashes .
I do n't have to figure it out because it does things the way I intuitively think it should .
The technology gets out of my way and I get to just do stuff.Yes , the interface is beautiful and that DOES make it easier to use .
That 's not a new idea ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetics ) .
More specifically , the iPhone UI has the best union of form and function I have ever seen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a pocket computer junkie.
I had a sharp pocket computer and an HP 15C in high school, a series of HP calculators through university, a Newton, and have switched back and forth between Palm, PocketPC/WM, through their upgrades and leapfrogging of each other over the years.
And I'm a "technical" user, too.
The last handheld I used consistently was a Sharp Zaurus with OpenBSD on it.
Command-line heaven.
Other than that old 15C, NOTHING I have had compares with my iPhone 3G even slightly.
The attraction?It does what I want.
It does it with no fuss.
The interface is very very consistent.
It very very rarely crashes.
I don't have to figure it out because it does things the way I intuitively think it should.
The technology gets out of my way and I get to just do stuff.Yes, the interface is beautiful and that DOES make it easier to use.
That's not a new idea ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetics ).
More specifically, the iPhone UI has the best union of form and function I have ever seen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789073</id>
	<title>Re:Hardware, schmardware, is it pleasant to use?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255880400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't really know how Apple does it. Their UI and usability aren't all THAT great, yet they consistently manage to turn out stuff that really is usable. Maybe the mystery is how everyone else manages to screw it up.</p> </div><p>Pick up a copy of The Humane Interface and you'll start looking at everything differently.  You'll see stark differences between things designed with usability in mind and things that were not.   Gawk in wonder at the size of the 'not' list...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't really know how Apple does it .
Their UI and usability are n't all THAT great , yet they consistently manage to turn out stuff that really is usable .
Maybe the mystery is how everyone else manages to screw it up .
Pick up a copy of The Humane Interface and you 'll start looking at everything differently .
You 'll see stark differences between things designed with usability in mind and things that were not .
Gawk in wonder at the size of the 'not ' list.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't really know how Apple does it.
Their UI and usability aren't all THAT great, yet they consistently manage to turn out stuff that really is usable.
Maybe the mystery is how everyone else manages to screw it up.
Pick up a copy of The Humane Interface and you'll start looking at everything differently.
You'll see stark differences between things designed with usability in mind and things that were not.
Gawk in wonder at the size of the 'not' list...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785615</id>
	<title>Re:most sophisticated mobile device?</title>
	<author>alexandre</author>
	<datestamp>1255893840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't wait to get mine, the only issue i have with the N900 is that it doesn't have a digital compass...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't wait to get mine , the only issue i have with the N900 is that it does n't have a digital compass.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't wait to get mine, the only issue i have with the N900 is that it doesn't have a digital compass...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784497</id>
	<title>Its the apps</title>
	<author>grapeape</author>
	<datestamp>1255883400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason the iPhone is so successful is the convenience of the app store, itunes and the sheer amount of content.  When apple first started the app store people seemed to talk as if it was simply a waste of time and resources but now its so far ahead of the game that no one seems able to catch up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason the iPhone is so successful is the convenience of the app store , itunes and the sheer amount of content .
When apple first started the app store people seemed to talk as if it was simply a waste of time and resources but now its so far ahead of the game that no one seems able to catch up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason the iPhone is so successful is the convenience of the app store, itunes and the sheer amount of content.
When apple first started the app store people seemed to talk as if it was simply a waste of time and resources but now its so far ahead of the game that no one seems able to catch up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789145</id>
	<title>Re:Hardware, schmardware, is it pleasant to use?</title>
	<author>kybred</author>
	<datestamp>1255881360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> It seems as if all they did was to avoid gross stupidity. That must be a lot harder to do than you'd think.</p></div><p>I think it boils down to this (from a <a href="http://despair.com/" title="despair.com">Despair.com</a> [despair.com] poster):</p><p>
<i>None of us is as dumb as all of us.</i>
</p><p>
Most companies don't understand this. The get a group of smart people together and assume that they'll come up with some really good ideas, but end up with a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design\_by\_committee" title="wikipedia.org">camel</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems as if all they did was to avoid gross stupidity .
That must be a lot harder to do than you 'd think.I think it boils down to this ( from a Despair.com [ despair.com ] poster ) : None of us is as dumb as all of us .
Most companies do n't understand this .
The get a group of smart people together and assume that they 'll come up with some really good ideas , but end up with a camel [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> It seems as if all they did was to avoid gross stupidity.
That must be a lot harder to do than you'd think.I think it boils down to this (from a Despair.com [despair.com] poster):
None of us is as dumb as all of us.
Most companies don't understand this.
The get a group of smart people together and assume that they'll come up with some really good ideas, but end up with a camel [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29795189</id>
	<title>Re:Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255971780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, IPv6 has the potential to take off too once people start using it over IPv4.  How's that working out so far?  Potential =/= results.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , IPv6 has the potential to take off too once people start using it over IPv4 .
How 's that working out so far ?
Potential = / = results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, IPv6 has the potential to take off too once people start using it over IPv4.
How's that working out so far?
Potential =/= results.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784317</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785161</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>rinoid</author>
	<datestamp>1255889820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's interesting.

The mobile space was pretty damn dormant here wasn't it before the iPhone heated things up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's interesting .
The mobile space was pretty damn dormant here was n't it before the iPhone heated things up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's interesting.
The mobile space was pretty damn dormant here wasn't it before the iPhone heated things up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29793383</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>artemis67</author>
	<datestamp>1255963920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoYr8-uG5C0" title="youtube.com">YouTube video</a> [youtube.com] of the commercial. It makes a pretty strong case, although the Droid isn't pictured anywhere in it.</p><p>A lot of iPhone users have been hoping that Verizon and Apple would be getting together in 2010, when AT&amp;T's exclusivity contract was rumored to expire. However, this is a pretty aggressive ad, certainly not one you'd expect for two companies coming together.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the YouTube video [ youtube.com ] of the commercial .
It makes a pretty strong case , although the Droid is n't pictured anywhere in it.A lot of iPhone users have been hoping that Verizon and Apple would be getting together in 2010 , when AT&amp;T 's exclusivity contract was rumored to expire .
However , this is a pretty aggressive ad , certainly not one you 'd expect for two companies coming together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the YouTube video [youtube.com] of the commercial.
It makes a pretty strong case, although the Droid isn't pictured anywhere in it.A lot of iPhone users have been hoping that Verizon and Apple would be getting together in 2010, when AT&amp;T's exclusivity contract was rumored to expire.
However, this is a pretty aggressive ad, certainly not one you'd expect for two companies coming together.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29799195</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255943220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That salesman was an idiot.</p><p>If you get the regular plan, you can add on text/data per phone after the fact.  That's how I have text/data on my phone.  In fact, we have two phones on our 5 phone family plan that are set up like that.</p><p>I would have called them up and complained.  They are a lot more responsive/helpful when you phone them then at the store.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That salesman was an idiot.If you get the regular plan , you can add on text/data per phone after the fact .
That 's how I have text/data on my phone .
In fact , we have two phones on our 5 phone family plan that are set up like that.I would have called them up and complained .
They are a lot more responsive/helpful when you phone them then at the store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That salesman was an idiot.If you get the regular plan, you can add on text/data per phone after the fact.
That's how I have text/data on my phone.
In fact, we have two phones on our 5 phone family plan that are set up like that.I would have called them up and complained.
They are a lot more responsive/helpful when you phone them then at the store.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788717</id>
	<title>Re:verizon network, no thanks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255876680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mod parent UP!  This is sooooo true.  In my house I have the exact opposite issue.  AT&amp;T bad Verizon good.  If i lived near my parents I would use sprint.  As AT&amp;T and verizon are bad there.  Pick a network that gets good coverage *WHERE YOU NEED IT*.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent UP !
This is sooooo true .
In my house I have the exact opposite issue .
AT&amp;T bad Verizon good .
If i lived near my parents I would use sprint .
As AT&amp;T and verizon are bad there .
Pick a network that gets good coverage * WHERE YOU NEED IT * .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent UP!
This is sooooo true.
In my house I have the exact opposite issue.
AT&amp;T bad Verizon good.
If i lived near my parents I would use sprint.
As AT&amp;T and verizon are bad there.
Pick a network that gets good coverage *WHERE YOU NEED IT*.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784041</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723</id>
	<title>IPhone.  Blah Blah Blah</title>
	<author>XPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1255876020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The iPhone is only popular because it's from Apple.  For years the IPhone didn't have:</p><p>IM<br>MMS<br>Cut/Paste<br>MP3/AAC ringtones<br>Video recording<br>Bluetooth A2DP</p><p>There's many other great phones and carriers that easily surpass the IPhone and AT&amp;T's shit network by a long-shot (Blackberry Tour, Palm Pre, HTC Pro)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The iPhone is only popular because it 's from Apple .
For years the IPhone did n't have : IMMMSCut/PasteMP3/AAC ringtonesVideo recordingBluetooth A2DPThere 's many other great phones and carriers that easily surpass the IPhone and AT&amp;T 's shit network by a long-shot ( Blackberry Tour , Palm Pre , HTC Pro )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iPhone is only popular because it's from Apple.
For years the IPhone didn't have:IMMMSCut/PasteMP3/AAC ringtonesVideo recordingBluetooth A2DPThere's many other great phones and carriers that easily surpass the IPhone and AT&amp;T's shit network by a long-shot (Blackberry Tour, Palm Pre, HTC Pro)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29791227</id>
	<title>Re:Typo in Summary</title>
	<author>sunspot42</author>
	<datestamp>1255944780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you!  I was going to post something similar.  You think Apple are control freaks, and AT&amp;T limits what features are available?  They're <b>amateurs</b> compared to Verizon.  I had a dumb Motorola phone with them for over 4 years, and paid a fortune during that time for all sorts of add-on features - data, contact synching, text messaging - that were standard with other carriers.  I'm actually paying less a month with AT&amp;T for my iPhone than I was for Verizon and their Crap Phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you !
I was going to post something similar .
You think Apple are control freaks , and AT&amp;T limits what features are available ?
They 're amateurs compared to Verizon .
I had a dumb Motorola phone with them for over 4 years , and paid a fortune during that time for all sorts of add-on features - data , contact synching , text messaging - that were standard with other carriers .
I 'm actually paying less a month with AT&amp;T for my iPhone than I was for Verizon and their Crap Phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you!
I was going to post something similar.
You think Apple are control freaks, and AT&amp;T limits what features are available?
They're amateurs compared to Verizon.
I had a dumb Motorola phone with them for over 4 years, and paid a fortune during that time for all sorts of add-on features - data, contact synching, text messaging - that were standard with other carriers.
I'm actually paying less a month with AT&amp;T for my iPhone than I was for Verizon and their Crap Phone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783859</id>
	<title>most sophisticated mobile device?</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1255877460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Specially from the hardware standpoint? Would be interesting to compare it with i.e. the <a href="http://maemo.nokia.com/n900/" title="nokia.com">Nokia N900</a> [nokia.com] that is about to hit the market... with the extra advantage of not being tied to Verizon or anyone else afaik.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Specially from the hardware standpoint ?
Would be interesting to compare it with i.e .
the Nokia N900 [ nokia.com ] that is about to hit the market... with the extra advantage of not being tied to Verizon or anyone else afaik .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Specially from the hardware standpoint?
Would be interesting to compare it with i.e.
the Nokia N900 [nokia.com] that is about to hit the market... with the extra advantage of not being tied to Verizon or anyone else afaik.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783975</id>
	<title>Re:why aren't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @720M</title>
	<author>edxwelch</author>
	<datestamp>1255878660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Why aren't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @720MHz? That should give them an advantage over the older OMAP3430 @600MHz.</p><p>battery life?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Why are n't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @ 720MHz ?
That should give them an advantage over the older OMAP3430 @ 600MHz.battery life ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Why aren't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @720MHz?
That should give them an advantage over the older OMAP3430 @600MHz.battery life?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783811</id>
	<title>Show Me a Sign</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255876920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want a competent alternative to the iPhone as much as the next guy... but (1) the iPhone is more successful for its interface, which is dead simple and beautiful, than for its (or its network's) capabilities, and (2) get back to me when you can <i>show me the phone and its interface</i>, the way Apple did with the iPhone.

</p><p>I don't carry a cell right now, but <a href="http://www.aprilynnepike/" title="www.aprilynnepike">my wife</a> [www.aprilynnepike] has an iPhone.  Before that, the only smartphone she ever used was a Treo, and while it was a nice model with many capabilities, she made no use of them because she found it confusing and complicated and inconvenient.  I've personally been hopeful for a good Android phone for a long time but so far it has failed to manifest.  So please excuse my skepticism, I'm ready to be converted the moment you show me a sign.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want a competent alternative to the iPhone as much as the next guy... but ( 1 ) the iPhone is more successful for its interface , which is dead simple and beautiful , than for its ( or its network 's ) capabilities , and ( 2 ) get back to me when you can show me the phone and its interface , the way Apple did with the iPhone .
I do n't carry a cell right now , but my wife [ www.aprilynnepike ] has an iPhone .
Before that , the only smartphone she ever used was a Treo , and while it was a nice model with many capabilities , she made no use of them because she found it confusing and complicated and inconvenient .
I 've personally been hopeful for a good Android phone for a long time but so far it has failed to manifest .
So please excuse my skepticism , I 'm ready to be converted the moment you show me a sign .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want a competent alternative to the iPhone as much as the next guy... but (1) the iPhone is more successful for its interface, which is dead simple and beautiful, than for its (or its network's) capabilities, and (2) get back to me when you can show me the phone and its interface, the way Apple did with the iPhone.
I don't carry a cell right now, but my wife [www.aprilynnepike] has an iPhone.
Before that, the only smartphone she ever used was a Treo, and while it was a nice model with many capabilities, she made no use of them because she found it confusing and complicated and inconvenient.
I've personally been hopeful for a good Android phone for a long time but so far it has failed to manifest.
So please excuse my skepticism, I'm ready to be converted the moment you show me a sign.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797055</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>EvilBudMan</author>
	<datestamp>1255978860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>--Verizon is also owned by Vodaphone, which has a much larger international market presence.--</p><p>Vodaphone does not control Verizon wireless although they own a substantial stake and have offered to buy it (I wish they would).</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon\_Wireless" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon\_Wireless</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>I think Vodaphone owns a 45\% stake and Verizon Communications owns the controlling stake with each saying they want to buy the other out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>--Verizon is also owned by Vodaphone , which has a much larger international market presence.--Vodaphone does not control Verizon wireless although they own a substantial stake and have offered to buy it ( I wish they would ) .http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon \ _Wireless [ wikipedia.org ] I think Vodaphone owns a 45 \ % stake and Verizon Communications owns the controlling stake with each saying they want to buy the other out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>--Verizon is also owned by Vodaphone, which has a much larger international market presence.--Vodaphone does not control Verizon wireless although they own a substantial stake and have offered to buy it (I wish they would).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon\_Wireless [wikipedia.org]I think Vodaphone owns a 45\% stake and Verizon Communications owns the controlling stake with each saying they want to buy the other out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785025</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783765</id>
	<title>The problem was never with their network</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255876560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem I had with Verizon was never with their network or their phones but the management decisions that were made to cripple those phones to charge customers more money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem I had with Verizon was never with their network or their phones but the management decisions that were made to cripple those phones to charge customers more money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem I had with Verizon was never with their network or their phones but the management decisions that were made to cripple those phones to charge customers more money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788135</id>
	<title>Another challenge to the iPhone</title>
	<author>bgspence</author>
	<datestamp>1255870620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And, I've got a dog that barks while he chases cars.</p><p>But, I don't think for all his barking he will become a Lexus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And , I 've got a dog that barks while he chases cars.But , I do n't think for all his barking he will become a Lexus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And, I've got a dog that barks while he chases cars.But, I don't think for all his barking he will become a Lexus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784855</id>
	<title>Re:why aren't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @720M</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255886880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...Battery life?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...Battery life ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Battery life?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785137</id>
	<title>Re:why aren't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @720M</title>
	<author>GeneralAntilles</author>
	<datestamp>1255889640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because the OMAP35x series is a catalog part sold to hobby projects and the like. It's not intended for use by handset manyfacturers and is missing some of the features they need (it's also a larger package than the OMAP34x which leaves less room for your other parts). You'd be better asking why they're not using the OMAP36x (45nm version of the OMAP34x).

Coming to you from an N900, by the way, which is almost certain to kick this thing's ass.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the OMAP35x series is a catalog part sold to hobby projects and the like .
It 's not intended for use by handset manyfacturers and is missing some of the features they need ( it 's also a larger package than the OMAP34x which leaves less room for your other parts ) .
You 'd be better asking why they 're not using the OMAP36x ( 45nm version of the OMAP34x ) .
Coming to you from an N900 , by the way , which is almost certain to kick this thing 's ass .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the OMAP35x series is a catalog part sold to hobby projects and the like.
It's not intended for use by handset manyfacturers and is missing some of the features they need (it's also a larger package than the OMAP34x which leaves less room for your other parts).
You'd be better asking why they're not using the OMAP36x (45nm version of the OMAP34x).
Coming to you from an N900, by the way, which is almost certain to kick this thing's ass.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783863</id>
	<title>Nokia N900</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255877460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Two words for you: Nokia N900. Maemo throws crappy android phones, and iphones out the window.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two words for you : Nokia N900 .
Maemo throws crappy android phones , and iphones out the window .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two words for you: Nokia N900.
Maemo throws crappy android phones, and iphones out the window.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29796073</id>
	<title>Bundle it with a mobile WOW killer too..</title>
	<author>Dareth</author>
	<datestamp>1255975320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hell, I bet it wouldn't take much time at all to convert Duke Nukem Forever into an MMO that runs on a mobile smart phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell , I bet it would n't take much time at all to convert Duke Nukem Forever into an MMO that runs on a mobile smart phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell, I bet it wouldn't take much time at all to convert Duke Nukem Forever into an MMO that runs on a mobile smart phone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1255876260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think they're even trying anymore.  Take this sentence from the summary:<p><div class="quote"><p> The Palm Pre could have been that challenger, but it lacked the Verizon network, and users were unimpressed with the hardware.</p></div><p>From a hardware standpoint, the Pre is pretty impressive, although I can't comment on the software not having used one.  But it failed because 'it lacked the Verizon network'?  What is this supposed to mean?  Every other network in the USA is so bad that a device has to be on Verizon to succeed?  </p><p>
And people wonder why all of the major handset manufacturers except Apple consider the US market a waste of their time...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think they 're even trying anymore .
Take this sentence from the summary : The Palm Pre could have been that challenger , but it lacked the Verizon network , and users were unimpressed with the hardware.From a hardware standpoint , the Pre is pretty impressive , although I ca n't comment on the software not having used one .
But it failed because 'it lacked the Verizon network ' ?
What is this supposed to mean ?
Every other network in the USA is so bad that a device has to be on Verizon to succeed ?
And people wonder why all of the major handset manufacturers except Apple consider the US market a waste of their time.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think they're even trying anymore.
Take this sentence from the summary: The Palm Pre could have been that challenger, but it lacked the Verizon network, and users were unimpressed with the hardware.From a hardware standpoint, the Pre is pretty impressive, although I can't comment on the software not having used one.
But it failed because 'it lacked the Verizon network'?
What is this supposed to mean?
Every other network in the USA is so bad that a device has to be on Verizon to succeed?
And people wonder why all of the major handset manufacturers except Apple consider the US market a waste of their time...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784149</id>
	<title>Re:What is the attraction to the iphone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255880220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is the electronic equivalent of what was the elite sport golf (or tennis before that). You don't <i>need</i> a iPhone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is the electronic equivalent of what was the elite sport golf ( or tennis before that ) .
You do n't need a iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is the electronic equivalent of what was the elite sport golf (or tennis before that).
You don't need a iPhone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784509</id>
	<title>Re:It's the applications, stupid</title>
	<author>The Living Fractal</author>
	<datestamp>1255883520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a relatively simple solution to the problem the app store poses to Apple's competitors:  Develop software that makes it extremely easy to port an application from the iPhone to Android, etc.</p><p>Then, suddenly, all of these app developers who aren't Apple find out they can put their app on the Android or Windows Mobile app stores also, and those stores rapidly catch up to Apple's store.  In other words, sit back and let Apple take the lead then use all of Apple's effort against them.</p><p>At least, that's what I would be very busy doing if I were Google and Microsoft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a relatively simple solution to the problem the app store poses to Apple 's competitors : Develop software that makes it extremely easy to port an application from the iPhone to Android , etc.Then , suddenly , all of these app developers who are n't Apple find out they can put their app on the Android or Windows Mobile app stores also , and those stores rapidly catch up to Apple 's store .
In other words , sit back and let Apple take the lead then use all of Apple 's effort against them.At least , that 's what I would be very busy doing if I were Google and Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a relatively simple solution to the problem the app store poses to Apple's competitors:  Develop software that makes it extremely easy to port an application from the iPhone to Android, etc.Then, suddenly, all of these app developers who aren't Apple find out they can put their app on the Android or Windows Mobile app stores also, and those stores rapidly catch up to Apple's store.
In other words, sit back and let Apple take the lead then use all of Apple's effort against them.At least, that's what I would be very busy doing if I were Google and Microsoft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783929</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784971</id>
	<title>Re:Show Me a Sign</title>
	<author>spikeb</author>
	<datestamp>1255888080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>if the interface was the only real barrier, the Pre would have probably knocked the iPhone off its perch</htmltext>
<tokenext>if the interface was the only real barrier , the Pre would have probably knocked the iPhone off its perch</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if the interface was the only real barrier, the Pre would have probably knocked the iPhone off its perch</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784531</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>ryanov</author>
	<datestamp>1255883760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think they mean the physical hardware, like the case/etc., not the specs.</p><p>That said, Palm has confirmed the Pre on Verizon for January, so... what are these people talking about?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think they mean the physical hardware , like the case/etc. , not the specs.That said , Palm has confirmed the Pre on Verizon for January , so... what are these people talking about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think they mean the physical hardware, like the case/etc., not the specs.That said, Palm has confirmed the Pre on Verizon for January, so... what are these people talking about?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785029</id>
	<title>Great Hardware + Verizon = Disappointment</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255888740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ditto also.  I bought an LG Versa which, excluding the gimmicky keyboard attachment, is a very capable piece of hardware. But couple it with Verizon's abysmal software and it just turns into a joke.  19 features out of 20 have me thinking "the people who designed this never actually tried to use it, did they?".   Disappointment at every turn.  My Sony Ericsson T616 that I got for free in 2004 is better in every respect except appearance, and with *much* worse hardware.  Bleh Verizon.  I'll believe it when I see it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ditto also .
I bought an LG Versa which , excluding the gimmicky keyboard attachment , is a very capable piece of hardware .
But couple it with Verizon 's abysmal software and it just turns into a joke .
19 features out of 20 have me thinking " the people who designed this never actually tried to use it , did they ? " .
Disappointment at every turn .
My Sony Ericsson T616 that I got for free in 2004 is better in every respect except appearance , and with * much * worse hardware .
Bleh Verizon .
I 'll believe it when I see it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ditto also.
I bought an LG Versa which, excluding the gimmicky keyboard attachment, is a very capable piece of hardware.
But couple it with Verizon's abysmal software and it just turns into a joke.
19 features out of 20 have me thinking "the people who designed this never actually tried to use it, did they?".
Disappointment at every turn.
My Sony Ericsson T616 that I got for free in 2004 is better in every respect except appearance, and with *much* worse hardware.
Bleh Verizon.
I'll believe it when I see it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783765</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784215</id>
	<title>Re:Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>khchung</author>
	<datestamp>1255880640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it's about the user experience</p></div><p> <b>Exactly.</b></p><p>I own both an iPhone and the PS3.  I hate DRM as much as the usual<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.er, but for Apple's App Store and Sony's PSN, I honestly admit they have hit the right balance, most importantly on the point that as a user, I am not perceptibly worse off due to the DRM.</p><p>E.g. with a DRM'ed CD or game, there would things that a legit buyer cannot do compared to a normal CD or game (namely, backup the content, or even use it normally).  But for App Store and PSN, I get to do the usual things I do for what I bought there.  Namely, I get to use the app on the iPhone, backup it up on PC.  For PSN, I can play the game on my PS3, and re-download in case I replace my HD or my PS3 (yes, I know there is a limit, but frankly I don't expect to replace my PS3 as often I do with PCs).</p><p>What's more, I can buy stuff from App Store and PSN even more easily than buying a book from Amazon!  (I didn't enable 1-click purchase in Amazon, but neither for App Store also)  And I can get what I bought in less than a few minutes of download time, then I get to use it without a glitch.</p><p>Whatever criticism you level at Apple for tightly controlling the iPhone, at least they succeeded in making stuff "just works".  Similarly for the PS3, but this kind of control is the norm for the console market. (And I guess the XBox 360 store would be similar, else it would lose a lot of market share to PS3)</p><p>I have my share of experience of tinkering with the PC, from the old days of tuning DOS config.sys to squeeze out the last byte out of EMS, mucking around interrupts of COM1 and COM2 to get CommandHQ to run using both mouse and modem.  But as I got older and have more money but less time, I am more inclined to pay a bit more for stuff that works with minimum hassle.</p><p>What's more, with iPhone, I can safely recommend to any non-techy friends with the need of long explanation about how it works.</p><p>That's why the iPhone is selling so well.  There won't be any "iPhone-killer" unless some other company can make their product with user experience at least just as good.  So it is unlikely it will come from a US telecom company.  There would be more chance if it came from Nintendo than Verizon.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's about the user experience Exactly.I own both an iPhone and the PS3 .
I hate DRM as much as the usual /.er , but for Apple 's App Store and Sony 's PSN , I honestly admit they have hit the right balance , most importantly on the point that as a user , I am not perceptibly worse off due to the DRM.E.g .
with a DRM'ed CD or game , there would things that a legit buyer can not do compared to a normal CD or game ( namely , backup the content , or even use it normally ) .
But for App Store and PSN , I get to do the usual things I do for what I bought there .
Namely , I get to use the app on the iPhone , backup it up on PC .
For PSN , I can play the game on my PS3 , and re-download in case I replace my HD or my PS3 ( yes , I know there is a limit , but frankly I do n't expect to replace my PS3 as often I do with PCs ) .What 's more , I can buy stuff from App Store and PSN even more easily than buying a book from Amazon !
( I did n't enable 1-click purchase in Amazon , but neither for App Store also ) And I can get what I bought in less than a few minutes of download time , then I get to use it without a glitch.Whatever criticism you level at Apple for tightly controlling the iPhone , at least they succeeded in making stuff " just works " .
Similarly for the PS3 , but this kind of control is the norm for the console market .
( And I guess the XBox 360 store would be similar , else it would lose a lot of market share to PS3 ) I have my share of experience of tinkering with the PC , from the old days of tuning DOS config.sys to squeeze out the last byte out of EMS , mucking around interrupts of COM1 and COM2 to get CommandHQ to run using both mouse and modem .
But as I got older and have more money but less time , I am more inclined to pay a bit more for stuff that works with minimum hassle.What 's more , with iPhone , I can safely recommend to any non-techy friends with the need of long explanation about how it works.That 's why the iPhone is selling so well .
There wo n't be any " iPhone-killer " unless some other company can make their product with user experience at least just as good .
So it is unlikely it will come from a US telecom company .
There would be more chance if it came from Nintendo than Verizon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's about the user experience Exactly.I own both an iPhone and the PS3.
I hate DRM as much as the usual /.er, but for Apple's App Store and Sony's PSN, I honestly admit they have hit the right balance, most importantly on the point that as a user, I am not perceptibly worse off due to the DRM.E.g.
with a DRM'ed CD or game, there would things that a legit buyer cannot do compared to a normal CD or game (namely, backup the content, or even use it normally).
But for App Store and PSN, I get to do the usual things I do for what I bought there.
Namely, I get to use the app on the iPhone, backup it up on PC.
For PSN, I can play the game on my PS3, and re-download in case I replace my HD or my PS3 (yes, I know there is a limit, but frankly I don't expect to replace my PS3 as often I do with PCs).What's more, I can buy stuff from App Store and PSN even more easily than buying a book from Amazon!
(I didn't enable 1-click purchase in Amazon, but neither for App Store also)  And I can get what I bought in less than a few minutes of download time, then I get to use it without a glitch.Whatever criticism you level at Apple for tightly controlling the iPhone, at least they succeeded in making stuff "just works".
Similarly for the PS3, but this kind of control is the norm for the console market.
(And I guess the XBox 360 store would be similar, else it would lose a lot of market share to PS3)I have my share of experience of tinkering with the PC, from the old days of tuning DOS config.sys to squeeze out the last byte out of EMS, mucking around interrupts of COM1 and COM2 to get CommandHQ to run using both mouse and modem.
But as I got older and have more money but less time, I am more inclined to pay a bit more for stuff that works with minimum hassle.What's more, with iPhone, I can safely recommend to any non-techy friends with the need of long explanation about how it works.That's why the iPhone is selling so well.
There won't be any "iPhone-killer" unless some other company can make their product with user experience at least just as good.
So it is unlikely it will come from a US telecom company.
There would be more chance if it came from Nintendo than Verizon.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29803747</id>
	<title>Re:IPhone. Blah Blah Blah</title>
	<author>sabre307</author>
	<datestamp>1255969260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's the Steve Jobs <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality\_distortion\_field" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Reality Distortion Field</a> [wikipedia.org]! The serious lack of Video Recording and Ringtones has been why I've avoided it and marveled at the people who hailed it as the greatest invention ever. I will admit that the interface was a serious advancement in UI development for small devices, and for that it should be commended, but as a phone, the original one really sucked!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field [ wikipedia.org ] !
The serious lack of Video Recording and Ringtones has been why I 've avoided it and marveled at the people who hailed it as the greatest invention ever .
I will admit that the interface was a serious advancement in UI development for small devices , and for that it should be commended , but as a phone , the original one really sucked !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field [wikipedia.org]!
The serious lack of Video Recording and Ringtones has been why I've avoided it and marveled at the people who hailed it as the greatest invention ever.
I will admit that the interface was a serious advancement in UI development for small devices, and for that it should be commended, but as a phone, the original one really sucked!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786381</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>dsg123456789</author>
	<datestamp>1255856400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let me give you an example:  I live in Boston, and I have a Verizon phone.  I know lots of people with AT&amp;T iPhones and Blackberries.  I am frequently the only person who has reception inside of buildings.

I don't have much desire to buy an iPhone because I won't even get good enough reception.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me give you an example : I live in Boston , and I have a Verizon phone .
I know lots of people with AT&amp;T iPhones and Blackberries .
I am frequently the only person who has reception inside of buildings .
I do n't have much desire to buy an iPhone because I wo n't even get good enough reception .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me give you an example:  I live in Boston, and I have a Verizon phone.
I know lots of people with AT&amp;T iPhones and Blackberries.
I am frequently the only person who has reception inside of buildings.
I don't have much desire to buy an iPhone because I won't even get good enough reception.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786659</id>
	<title>Re:It's the applications, stupid</title>
	<author>dirkdodgers</author>
	<datestamp>1255858440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The iPhone form factor makes it clumsy as a smart phone, and the lack of physical keyboard makes it clumsy as a mobile internet device.</p><p>Also, iPhone apps are currently developed for a single form factor.</p><p>Android-based manufacturers will be able to deliver smart phones with more practical phone form factors, and also deliver mobile internet devices with physical keyboards and other physical inputs.</p><p>If Apple attempts this, either their app store will become segmented or app development and approval costs will increase. And once you need to make your app work on multiple form factors, you might just decide to move to the Android platform where for the same development cost you get access to a larger market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The iPhone form factor makes it clumsy as a smart phone , and the lack of physical keyboard makes it clumsy as a mobile internet device.Also , iPhone apps are currently developed for a single form factor.Android-based manufacturers will be able to deliver smart phones with more practical phone form factors , and also deliver mobile internet devices with physical keyboards and other physical inputs.If Apple attempts this , either their app store will become segmented or app development and approval costs will increase .
And once you need to make your app work on multiple form factors , you might just decide to move to the Android platform where for the same development cost you get access to a larger market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iPhone form factor makes it clumsy as a smart phone, and the lack of physical keyboard makes it clumsy as a mobile internet device.Also, iPhone apps are currently developed for a single form factor.Android-based manufacturers will be able to deliver smart phones with more practical phone form factors, and also deliver mobile internet devices with physical keyboards and other physical inputs.If Apple attempts this, either their app store will become segmented or app development and approval costs will increase.
And once you need to make your app work on multiple form factors, you might just decide to move to the Android platform where for the same development cost you get access to a larger market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783929</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783881</id>
	<title>why aren't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @720MHz?</title>
	<author>unix\_geek\_512</author>
	<datestamp>1255877640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why aren't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @720MHz? That should give them an advantage over the older OMAP3430 @600MHz.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are n't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @ 720MHz ?
That should give them an advantage over the older OMAP3430 @ 600MHz .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why aren't they using the new TI OMAP3530 @720MHz?
That should give them an advantage over the older OMAP3430 @600MHz.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797891</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>ksheff</author>
	<datestamp>1255982160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Except that it is made out of plastic and <b>it flexes</b></p></div> </blockquote><p>I haven't noticed that with the one that I've had since June.  What are you doing with your phone to make it flex?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that it is made out of plastic and it flexes I have n't noticed that with the one that I 've had since June .
What are you doing with your phone to make it flex ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that it is made out of plastic and it flexes I haven't noticed that with the one that I've had since June.
What are you doing with your phone to make it flex?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785025</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784287</id>
	<title>iphone killer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255881180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so will it be called the "Judas phone"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so will it be called the " Judas phone " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so will it be called the "Judas phone"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788093</id>
	<title>Maybe not their network, but AT&amp;T better for m</title>
	<author>swb</author>
	<datestamp>1255870260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was a long-time Verizon customer (dating back to Airtouch Cellular).  As an IT consultant I'm all over the Twin Cities metro area and there were a number of places where Verizon's network was weak and dropped calls like crazy (Highland Park, by the water reservoir -- complete VZW deadzone) and a number of customer buildings where coverage was crap.</p><p>I eventually got sick of the shit-flavored crippled handset choices and gave into the iPhone.  Despite the massive complaints you seem to hear about AT&amp;T's network, at least for me it's been actually better than Verizon from a network perspective.  The Verizon dead buildings &amp; zones are no longer dead, I'd call data throughput dead even (although with different hardware, it's tough to make a apples-apples comparison), and I can use data service ON THE PHONE, which I couldn't do with Verizon.</p><p>About the only drawback is one particular customer whose building seems a perfect AT&amp;T shield; but outside that one spot, AT&amp;T has the advantage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was a long-time Verizon customer ( dating back to Airtouch Cellular ) .
As an IT consultant I 'm all over the Twin Cities metro area and there were a number of places where Verizon 's network was weak and dropped calls like crazy ( Highland Park , by the water reservoir -- complete VZW deadzone ) and a number of customer buildings where coverage was crap.I eventually got sick of the shit-flavored crippled handset choices and gave into the iPhone .
Despite the massive complaints you seem to hear about AT&amp;T 's network , at least for me it 's been actually better than Verizon from a network perspective .
The Verizon dead buildings &amp; zones are no longer dead , I 'd call data throughput dead even ( although with different hardware , it 's tough to make a apples-apples comparison ) , and I can use data service ON THE PHONE , which I could n't do with Verizon.About the only drawback is one particular customer whose building seems a perfect AT&amp;T shield ; but outside that one spot , AT&amp;T has the advantage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was a long-time Verizon customer (dating back to Airtouch Cellular).
As an IT consultant I'm all over the Twin Cities metro area and there were a number of places where Verizon's network was weak and dropped calls like crazy (Highland Park, by the water reservoir -- complete VZW deadzone) and a number of customer buildings where coverage was crap.I eventually got sick of the shit-flavored crippled handset choices and gave into the iPhone.
Despite the massive complaints you seem to hear about AT&amp;T's network, at least for me it's been actually better than Verizon from a network perspective.
The Verizon dead buildings &amp; zones are no longer dead, I'd call data throughput dead even (although with different hardware, it's tough to make a apples-apples comparison), and I can use data service ON THE PHONE, which I couldn't do with Verizon.About the only drawback is one particular customer whose building seems a perfect AT&amp;T shield; but outside that one spot, AT&amp;T has the advantage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783765</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29844273</id>
	<title>Re:Hardware, schmardware, is it pleasant to use?</title>
	<author>dbcad7</author>
	<datestamp>1256300460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have used an Android phone.. It's dead simple to use.. Instead of basing your decisions on others comments, just go to a TMobile, Sprint, and soon Verizon store and try one.. It's so simple the myTouch doesn't even come with a manual, just basic instructions like how to install the battery.. You can get a manual online, but you would have to be brain dead to need it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have used an Android phone.. It 's dead simple to use.. Instead of basing your decisions on others comments , just go to a TMobile , Sprint , and soon Verizon store and try one.. It 's so simple the myTouch does n't even come with a manual , just basic instructions like how to install the battery.. You can get a manual online , but you would have to be brain dead to need it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have used an Android phone.. It's dead simple to use.. Instead of basing your decisions on others comments, just go to a TMobile, Sprint, and soon Verizon store and try one.. It's so simple the myTouch doesn't even come with a manual, just basic instructions like how to install the battery.. You can get a manual online, but you would have to be brain dead to need it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29792343</id>
	<title>Funny</title>
	<author>Namarrgon</author>
	<datestamp>1255957800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's exactly what they said about Windows Mobile's apps when iPhone came out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's exactly what they said about Windows Mobile 's apps when iPhone came out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's exactly what they said about Windows Mobile's apps when iPhone came out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783929</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784601</id>
	<title>Meh.</title>
	<author>otis wildflower</author>
	<datestamp>1255884300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Verizon: great network, over priced, over locked-down on devices, stupid costy "services"..</p><p>I guess the question is, has Apple forced them to stop being stupid, or will they do stuff like disable built-in functionality on android phone to sell overpriced crap service that would have been provided for free by the hardware?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Verizon : great network , over priced , over locked-down on devices , stupid costy " services " ..I guess the question is , has Apple forced them to stop being stupid , or will they do stuff like disable built-in functionality on android phone to sell overpriced crap service that would have been provided for free by the hardware ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Verizon: great network, over priced, over locked-down on devices, stupid costy "services"..I guess the question is, has Apple forced them to stop being stupid, or will they do stuff like disable built-in functionality on android phone to sell overpriced crap service that would have been provided for free by the hardware?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786559</id>
	<title>Physical keyboard a winner</title>
	<author>dirkdodgers</author>
	<datestamp>1255857780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I appreciate my iPhone aesthetically, and the apps and touch screen gestures are phenomenal, but for me the lack of a physical keyboard means the iPhone stays primarily a smart phone and not a mobile internet device.</p><p>The problem is that the iPhone's form factor makes it not a very practical smart phone, all things considered.</p><p>Whereas a mobile internet device to me is a device that I can sit down in a coffee shop, browse the internet, and write emails, comfortably and without compromises. I can't do this on the iPhone either.</p><p>My iPhone is primarily a technical curiosity that I tolerate because I think it's a cool, innovative platform.</p><p>But I think the future will hold two more specialized devices:<br>1) a smart phone with a more efficient and practical form factor, with Apple quality touch input and apps<br>2) a mobile internet device with a full physical keyboard, with Apple quality touch input and apps</p><p>I know the open Android market will ensure there are companies that deliver these devices. It remains to be seen whether Apple will be blindsided or lead.</p><p>Apple's current apps will become a liability here because unlike Android apps, they are developed for only a single form factor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I appreciate my iPhone aesthetically , and the apps and touch screen gestures are phenomenal , but for me the lack of a physical keyboard means the iPhone stays primarily a smart phone and not a mobile internet device.The problem is that the iPhone 's form factor makes it not a very practical smart phone , all things considered.Whereas a mobile internet device to me is a device that I can sit down in a coffee shop , browse the internet , and write emails , comfortably and without compromises .
I ca n't do this on the iPhone either.My iPhone is primarily a technical curiosity that I tolerate because I think it 's a cool , innovative platform.But I think the future will hold two more specialized devices : 1 ) a smart phone with a more efficient and practical form factor , with Apple quality touch input and apps2 ) a mobile internet device with a full physical keyboard , with Apple quality touch input and appsI know the open Android market will ensure there are companies that deliver these devices .
It remains to be seen whether Apple will be blindsided or lead.Apple 's current apps will become a liability here because unlike Android apps , they are developed for only a single form factor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I appreciate my iPhone aesthetically, and the apps and touch screen gestures are phenomenal, but for me the lack of a physical keyboard means the iPhone stays primarily a smart phone and not a mobile internet device.The problem is that the iPhone's form factor makes it not a very practical smart phone, all things considered.Whereas a mobile internet device to me is a device that I can sit down in a coffee shop, browse the internet, and write emails, comfortably and without compromises.
I can't do this on the iPhone either.My iPhone is primarily a technical curiosity that I tolerate because I think it's a cool, innovative platform.But I think the future will hold two more specialized devices:1) a smart phone with a more efficient and practical form factor, with Apple quality touch input and apps2) a mobile internet device with a full physical keyboard, with Apple quality touch input and appsI know the open Android market will ensure there are companies that deliver these devices.
It remains to be seen whether Apple will be blindsided or lead.Apple's current apps will become a liability here because unlike Android apps, they are developed for only a single form factor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913</id>
	<title>What is the attraction to the iphone?</title>
	<author>bogaboga</author>
	<datestamp>1255878060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can anyone who has an iPhone tell me what the attraction to this device is? When I tried it, I was impressed by its technology but unimpressed by the price tag and its overall look. Its applications were all irrelevant to me and issues with its batteries made matters worse.</p><p>Question: What makes the iphone "a must have device" in today's economy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can anyone who has an iPhone tell me what the attraction to this device is ?
When I tried it , I was impressed by its technology but unimpressed by the price tag and its overall look .
Its applications were all irrelevant to me and issues with its batteries made matters worse.Question : What makes the iphone " a must have device " in today 's economy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can anyone who has an iPhone tell me what the attraction to this device is?
When I tried it, I was impressed by its technology but unimpressed by the price tag and its overall look.
Its applications were all irrelevant to me and issues with its batteries made matters worse.Question: What makes the iphone "a must have device" in today's economy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783987</id>
	<title>I saw an add for the droid last night</title>
	<author>chafey</author>
	<datestamp>1255878720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and while it does seem to have some better features than my iPhone, none of them were exciting enough for me to even consider looking at it.  I love my iPhone and don't see any reason to replace it with anything else until another revolution occurs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>and while it does seem to have some better features than my iPhone , none of them were exciting enough for me to even consider looking at it .
I love my iPhone and do n't see any reason to replace it with anything else until another revolution occurs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and while it does seem to have some better features than my iPhone, none of them were exciting enough for me to even consider looking at it.
I love my iPhone and don't see any reason to replace it with anything else until another revolution occurs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789427</id>
	<title>Re:Hardware, schmardware, is it pleasant to use?</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1255883280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nope, digital cameras suck.  It's just that nobody has come along and done one right yet.  I started out with full manual SLRs when I was ten years old so I quite like the arrangement of my DSLR, but even I hate what the point and shoots do.  Particularly when a friend or relative comes along and says "I can't remember how to do X" and hands me a camera so I can hunt through the menus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope , digital cameras suck .
It 's just that nobody has come along and done one right yet .
I started out with full manual SLRs when I was ten years old so I quite like the arrangement of my DSLR , but even I hate what the point and shoots do .
Particularly when a friend or relative comes along and says " I ca n't remember how to do X " and hands me a camera so I can hunt through the menus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope, digital cameras suck.
It's just that nobody has come along and done one right yet.
I started out with full manual SLRs when I was ten years old so I quite like the arrangement of my DSLR, but even I hate what the point and shoots do.
Particularly when a friend or relative comes along and says "I can't remember how to do X" and hands me a camera so I can hunt through the menus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784699</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255885320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just switched from Verizon/Blackberry to Sprint/Pre.  I have a suspicion that the "the Voice" which keeps yapping and droning about how much a disappointment the Pre is doesn't have his eyes open, hasn't properly evaluated the Pre, has a conflict of interest, or is otherwise NOT an impartial reporter.  Why doesn't the voice just shut up and let the market sort things out?  The Pre is gaining momentum by the day.</p><p>BTW, I bought an iTouch nine months ago with the intention of eventually getting an Iphone.  I use my iTouch extensively via WiFi and and like it quite a lot -- about as much as I like my Pre.   After a lot of personal trial, I CHOSE the Pre OVER the iPhone because of (a) personal experience of getting repeatedly cheated and abused by AT&amp;T (I don't like to deal with crooks) (b) hearing about bandwidth problems with their overloaded network and their last place customer service (c) noting the DRAMATICALLY higher cost of monthly ownership for monthly service.   I pay, I think, $63 a month for unlimited cell to cell calls, 450 minutes to land phones, full, UNLIMITED INTERNET and instant messaging.  I was paying $150 a month with Verizon for really no more (and actually much less in terms of the phone).   What would I pay for equivalent AT&amp;T service (provided I could actually get it, given AT&amp;T's well publicized data access problems)?</p><p>I also get a FREE voice+GPS NAVIGATOR application (more than google maps) that appears to compare quite favorably with the one I was paying Verizon something like $12 extra a month to use.   My internet browsing with the Pre is unquestionably BETTER than what I could get on an iPhone.  On both the Pre and my iTouch I can smoothly access pretty much any site -- including my google docs spreadsheets.  However, the Pre has considerably BETTER data entry and full multitasking, which is important when you need to log on to a password protected site or edit a spreadsheet (I can't do the latter, at all, with my iTouch but I can do limited editing with my Pre). And -- oh yes -- the full multitasking of the Pre puts the iPhone to shame in terms of usability.  Being able to see the full screen and type at the same time is really nice -- much better than on the iTouch -- and I now have full cut and paste and jumping between applications when I need extra information.</p><p>What have I given up by not chosing an iPhone?   Well, obviously, I don't have the 70k or so iPhone apps.  However, new apps are pouring onto the Pre, at this point, in quite a deluge and I now have most of my major app bases (Pandora, weather, navigation, etc.) pretty well covered.  I'm still looking for a much smarter calendering/todo function and a more full-function calculator, but expect that is just a matter of a month or two more.  So, I have no doubt about my apps needs being met.  I am proud to say I don't impulse buy songs, so inability to buy iTunes songs on the fly isn't a problem for me whatsoever.  I am glad I can sync to iTunes from my computer for my music library and some podcasts; it would sting if that was taken away again by Apple but it wouldn't be enough of a problem to cause me to regret my platform, given a full weighing of pros and cons.</p><p>Anyway, I looked at all the alternatives -- including iPhone/AT&amp;T  (and let's not forget that when you take the iPhone bone you have to take the AT&amp;T DOG with it.  I chose with full knowledge of my trade offs and, after a month with the Pre, I can say I am ABSOLUTELY DELIGHTED WITH MY PRE!</p><p>Can "the Voice" shut up with his biased and provocative putting down of the Pre and stick to the FACTS?  I suspect he isn't capable of being objective on this topic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just switched from Verizon/Blackberry to Sprint/Pre .
I have a suspicion that the " the Voice " which keeps yapping and droning about how much a disappointment the Pre is does n't have his eyes open , has n't properly evaluated the Pre , has a conflict of interest , or is otherwise NOT an impartial reporter .
Why does n't the voice just shut up and let the market sort things out ?
The Pre is gaining momentum by the day.BTW , I bought an iTouch nine months ago with the intention of eventually getting an Iphone .
I use my iTouch extensively via WiFi and and like it quite a lot -- about as much as I like my Pre .
After a lot of personal trial , I CHOSE the Pre OVER the iPhone because of ( a ) personal experience of getting repeatedly cheated and abused by AT&amp;T ( I do n't like to deal with crooks ) ( b ) hearing about bandwidth problems with their overloaded network and their last place customer service ( c ) noting the DRAMATICALLY higher cost of monthly ownership for monthly service .
I pay , I think , $ 63 a month for unlimited cell to cell calls , 450 minutes to land phones , full , UNLIMITED INTERNET and instant messaging .
I was paying $ 150 a month with Verizon for really no more ( and actually much less in terms of the phone ) .
What would I pay for equivalent AT&amp;T service ( provided I could actually get it , given AT&amp;T 's well publicized data access problems ) ? I also get a FREE voice + GPS NAVIGATOR application ( more than google maps ) that appears to compare quite favorably with the one I was paying Verizon something like $ 12 extra a month to use .
My internet browsing with the Pre is unquestionably BETTER than what I could get on an iPhone .
On both the Pre and my iTouch I can smoothly access pretty much any site -- including my google docs spreadsheets .
However , the Pre has considerably BETTER data entry and full multitasking , which is important when you need to log on to a password protected site or edit a spreadsheet ( I ca n't do the latter , at all , with my iTouch but I can do limited editing with my Pre ) .
And -- oh yes -- the full multitasking of the Pre puts the iPhone to shame in terms of usability .
Being able to see the full screen and type at the same time is really nice -- much better than on the iTouch -- and I now have full cut and paste and jumping between applications when I need extra information.What have I given up by not chosing an iPhone ?
Well , obviously , I do n't have the 70k or so iPhone apps .
However , new apps are pouring onto the Pre , at this point , in quite a deluge and I now have most of my major app bases ( Pandora , weather , navigation , etc .
) pretty well covered .
I 'm still looking for a much smarter calendering/todo function and a more full-function calculator , but expect that is just a matter of a month or two more .
So , I have no doubt about my apps needs being met .
I am proud to say I do n't impulse buy songs , so inability to buy iTunes songs on the fly is n't a problem for me whatsoever .
I am glad I can sync to iTunes from my computer for my music library and some podcasts ; it would sting if that was taken away again by Apple but it would n't be enough of a problem to cause me to regret my platform , given a full weighing of pros and cons.Anyway , I looked at all the alternatives -- including iPhone/AT&amp;T ( and let 's not forget that when you take the iPhone bone you have to take the AT&amp;T DOG with it .
I chose with full knowledge of my trade offs and , after a month with the Pre , I can say I am ABSOLUTELY DELIGHTED WITH MY PRE ! Can " the Voice " shut up with his biased and provocative putting down of the Pre and stick to the FACTS ?
I suspect he is n't capable of being objective on this topic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just switched from Verizon/Blackberry to Sprint/Pre.
I have a suspicion that the "the Voice" which keeps yapping and droning about how much a disappointment the Pre is doesn't have his eyes open, hasn't properly evaluated the Pre, has a conflict of interest, or is otherwise NOT an impartial reporter.
Why doesn't the voice just shut up and let the market sort things out?
The Pre is gaining momentum by the day.BTW, I bought an iTouch nine months ago with the intention of eventually getting an Iphone.
I use my iTouch extensively via WiFi and and like it quite a lot -- about as much as I like my Pre.
After a lot of personal trial, I CHOSE the Pre OVER the iPhone because of (a) personal experience of getting repeatedly cheated and abused by AT&amp;T (I don't like to deal with crooks) (b) hearing about bandwidth problems with their overloaded network and their last place customer service (c) noting the DRAMATICALLY higher cost of monthly ownership for monthly service.
I pay, I think, $63 a month for unlimited cell to cell calls, 450 minutes to land phones, full, UNLIMITED INTERNET and instant messaging.
I was paying $150 a month with Verizon for really no more (and actually much less in terms of the phone).
What would I pay for equivalent AT&amp;T service (provided I could actually get it, given AT&amp;T's well publicized data access problems)?I also get a FREE voice+GPS NAVIGATOR application (more than google maps) that appears to compare quite favorably with the one I was paying Verizon something like $12 extra a month to use.
My internet browsing with the Pre is unquestionably BETTER than what I could get on an iPhone.
On both the Pre and my iTouch I can smoothly access pretty much any site -- including my google docs spreadsheets.
However, the Pre has considerably BETTER data entry and full multitasking, which is important when you need to log on to a password protected site or edit a spreadsheet (I can't do the latter, at all, with my iTouch but I can do limited editing with my Pre).
And -- oh yes -- the full multitasking of the Pre puts the iPhone to shame in terms of usability.
Being able to see the full screen and type at the same time is really nice -- much better than on the iTouch -- and I now have full cut and paste and jumping between applications when I need extra information.What have I given up by not chosing an iPhone?
Well, obviously, I don't have the 70k or so iPhone apps.
However, new apps are pouring onto the Pre, at this point, in quite a deluge and I now have most of my major app bases (Pandora, weather, navigation, etc.
) pretty well covered.
I'm still looking for a much smarter calendering/todo function and a more full-function calculator, but expect that is just a matter of a month or two more.
So, I have no doubt about my apps needs being met.
I am proud to say I don't impulse buy songs, so inability to buy iTunes songs on the fly isn't a problem for me whatsoever.
I am glad I can sync to iTunes from my computer for my music library and some podcasts; it would sting if that was taken away again by Apple but it wouldn't be enough of a problem to cause me to regret my platform, given a full weighing of pros and cons.Anyway, I looked at all the alternatives -- including iPhone/AT&amp;T  (and let's not forget that when you take the iPhone bone you have to take the AT&amp;T DOG with it.
I chose with full knowledge of my trade offs and, after a month with the Pre, I can say I am ABSOLUTELY DELIGHTED WITH MY PRE!Can "the Voice" shut up with his biased and provocative putting down of the Pre and stick to the FACTS?
I suspect he isn't capable of being objective on this topic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29831925</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256146920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your sprint technician was an idiot. I've always had data on my phone and not on my wifes. Also, the Sprint data plan is only $15 dollars a month. You sure you were at the Sprint dealer?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your sprint technician was an idiot .
I 've always had data on my phone and not on my wifes .
Also , the Sprint data plan is only $ 15 dollars a month .
You sure you were at the Sprint dealer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your sprint technician was an idiot.
I've always had data on my phone and not on my wifes.
Also, the Sprint data plan is only $15 dollars a month.
You sure you were at the Sprint dealer?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788163</id>
	<title>What I find most telling about these stories</title>
	<author>RogerWilco</author>
	<datestamp>1255870860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I find most telling about these stories, is that in just about 2 years since Apple has entered the smartphone market, they have become the product to beat, the benchmark against which all others are measured. How did it happen that sophisticated, tech savvy and powerful companies like Microsoft, Nokia, Sony and RIM have such a hard time coming up with an answer, and only Google seems to be going somewhere?</p><p>I don't have all the answers, but one thing that seems clear is that Apple totally focusses on the user experience. I once made the error in 2000 to buy a PocketPC instead of a Palm based on the hardware specs. I learned then that a 16Mhz machine can be a better choice then a 200 Mhz one, if the first has been properly designed.</p><p>I've been using Nokia phones in the past, as they seem to understand the same lesson, I'm a little puzzled why they and the other established forces in the market have such a hard time formulating an answer to the iPhone. But then the seem thing seems to be happening in the MP3 player market.</p><p>What does Apple do that makes them so dominant in these markets so quickly, that the other players seem to fail to do? Even I've been converted recently, having bought a Macbook a year ago, and an iPhone last week, after having had a good experience with my iPod for years. Somehow other products in the same price range just don't measure up. (I did quite an extensive comparison with my alternative OS being Linux).</p><p>How does Apple become the measuring stick and the product to beat so quicky, even Microsoft usually needs half a decade and Billions and often they don't really succeed if it's outside the direct Windows sphere of control. (WinCE/Mobile/Phone, Xbox?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I find most telling about these stories , is that in just about 2 years since Apple has entered the smartphone market , they have become the product to beat , the benchmark against which all others are measured .
How did it happen that sophisticated , tech savvy and powerful companies like Microsoft , Nokia , Sony and RIM have such a hard time coming up with an answer , and only Google seems to be going somewhere ? I do n't have all the answers , but one thing that seems clear is that Apple totally focusses on the user experience .
I once made the error in 2000 to buy a PocketPC instead of a Palm based on the hardware specs .
I learned then that a 16Mhz machine can be a better choice then a 200 Mhz one , if the first has been properly designed.I 've been using Nokia phones in the past , as they seem to understand the same lesson , I 'm a little puzzled why they and the other established forces in the market have such a hard time formulating an answer to the iPhone .
But then the seem thing seems to be happening in the MP3 player market.What does Apple do that makes them so dominant in these markets so quickly , that the other players seem to fail to do ?
Even I 've been converted recently , having bought a Macbook a year ago , and an iPhone last week , after having had a good experience with my iPod for years .
Somehow other products in the same price range just do n't measure up .
( I did quite an extensive comparison with my alternative OS being Linux ) .How does Apple become the measuring stick and the product to beat so quicky , even Microsoft usually needs half a decade and Billions and often they do n't really succeed if it 's outside the direct Windows sphere of control .
( WinCE/Mobile/Phone , Xbox ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I find most telling about these stories, is that in just about 2 years since Apple has entered the smartphone market, they have become the product to beat, the benchmark against which all others are measured.
How did it happen that sophisticated, tech savvy and powerful companies like Microsoft, Nokia, Sony and RIM have such a hard time coming up with an answer, and only Google seems to be going somewhere?I don't have all the answers, but one thing that seems clear is that Apple totally focusses on the user experience.
I once made the error in 2000 to buy a PocketPC instead of a Palm based on the hardware specs.
I learned then that a 16Mhz machine can be a better choice then a 200 Mhz one, if the first has been properly designed.I've been using Nokia phones in the past, as they seem to understand the same lesson, I'm a little puzzled why they and the other established forces in the market have such a hard time formulating an answer to the iPhone.
But then the seem thing seems to be happening in the MP3 player market.What does Apple do that makes them so dominant in these markets so quickly, that the other players seem to fail to do?
Even I've been converted recently, having bought a Macbook a year ago, and an iPhone last week, after having had a good experience with my iPod for years.
Somehow other products in the same price range just don't measure up.
(I did quite an extensive comparison with my alternative OS being Linux).How does Apple become the measuring stick and the product to beat so quicky, even Microsoft usually needs half a decade and Billions and often they don't really succeed if it's outside the direct Windows sphere of control.
(WinCE/Mobile/Phone, Xbox?
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786683</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>RyuuzakiTetsuya</author>
	<datestamp>1255858500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't hate *A* phone because of the network it's on, or you can't hate the *Pre* because of the network it's on?</p><p>As a rabid iPhone user, I can tell you it's easy to hate a phone because of the network it's on.</p><p>The Pre however, is on a decent network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't hate * A * phone because of the network it 's on , or you ca n't hate the * Pre * because of the network it 's on ? As a rabid iPhone user , I can tell you it 's easy to hate a phone because of the network it 's on.The Pre however , is on a decent network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't hate *A* phone because of the network it's on, or you can't hate the *Pre* because of the network it's on?As a rabid iPhone user, I can tell you it's easy to hate a phone because of the network it's on.The Pre however, is on a decent network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784989</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783929</id>
	<title>It's the applications, stupid</title>
	<author>Fished</author>
	<datestamp>1255878180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I truly don't think Apple has anything to worry about.  The iPhone's greatest strength is not the iPhone itself, but the App Store--the 10's of thousands of applications, games, etc. that are already available for it.  The quality of these applications has improved markedly over the past year, and it's going to continue to improve.  What does Android have? They say "thousands", but market realities being what they are I'm sure that the quality and development time that has gone into these thousands just isn't there.  "There's an app for that" about covers it--with my iPhone, I <b>know</b> that whatever I'm doing I will have a choice of several apps that do it.</p><p>Can Android catch up?  Probably eventually.  But I think it's going to be difficult.  First, Apple's already got a huge lead, and this is a self-perpetuating cycle.  Huge lead means more developers, which means huge lead continues.  Second, I think that in the long run Android's hardware diversity will hurt it when it comes to (for example) games--it's a pain for game developers to have to test on a wide variety of devices, and many of them may not bother until Android has proved itself as a platform.  Last, it's worth remembering that Apple still commands a huge lead in the all-important digital content market.  This creates a big incentive for people with large iTunes libraries to stay with iPhone.</p><p>Is Verizon's network better?  Yes, probably.  However, it's also reaching saturation.  I live in a very rural area and have both an iPhone (personal) and a Verizon cell phone (work), and I pretty much get coverage everywhere I go.  And let's not forget that AT&amp;T's going to provide adequate coverage for 90+\% of the population anyway, even if they do get spotty in rural areas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I truly do n't think Apple has anything to worry about .
The iPhone 's greatest strength is not the iPhone itself , but the App Store--the 10 's of thousands of applications , games , etc .
that are already available for it .
The quality of these applications has improved markedly over the past year , and it 's going to continue to improve .
What does Android have ?
They say " thousands " , but market realities being what they are I 'm sure that the quality and development time that has gone into these thousands just is n't there .
" There 's an app for that " about covers it--with my iPhone , I know that whatever I 'm doing I will have a choice of several apps that do it.Can Android catch up ?
Probably eventually .
But I think it 's going to be difficult .
First , Apple 's already got a huge lead , and this is a self-perpetuating cycle .
Huge lead means more developers , which means huge lead continues .
Second , I think that in the long run Android 's hardware diversity will hurt it when it comes to ( for example ) games--it 's a pain for game developers to have to test on a wide variety of devices , and many of them may not bother until Android has proved itself as a platform .
Last , it 's worth remembering that Apple still commands a huge lead in the all-important digital content market .
This creates a big incentive for people with large iTunes libraries to stay with iPhone.Is Verizon 's network better ?
Yes , probably .
However , it 's also reaching saturation .
I live in a very rural area and have both an iPhone ( personal ) and a Verizon cell phone ( work ) , and I pretty much get coverage everywhere I go .
And let 's not forget that AT&amp;T 's going to provide adequate coverage for 90 + \ % of the population anyway , even if they do get spotty in rural areas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I truly don't think Apple has anything to worry about.
The iPhone's greatest strength is not the iPhone itself, but the App Store--the 10's of thousands of applications, games, etc.
that are already available for it.
The quality of these applications has improved markedly over the past year, and it's going to continue to improve.
What does Android have?
They say "thousands", but market realities being what they are I'm sure that the quality and development time that has gone into these thousands just isn't there.
"There's an app for that" about covers it--with my iPhone, I know that whatever I'm doing I will have a choice of several apps that do it.Can Android catch up?
Probably eventually.
But I think it's going to be difficult.
First, Apple's already got a huge lead, and this is a self-perpetuating cycle.
Huge lead means more developers, which means huge lead continues.
Second, I think that in the long run Android's hardware diversity will hurt it when it comes to (for example) games--it's a pain for game developers to have to test on a wide variety of devices, and many of them may not bother until Android has proved itself as a platform.
Last, it's worth remembering that Apple still commands a huge lead in the all-important digital content market.
This creates a big incentive for people with large iTunes libraries to stay with iPhone.Is Verizon's network better?
Yes, probably.
However, it's also reaching saturation.
I live in a very rural area and have both an iPhone (personal) and a Verizon cell phone (work), and I pretty much get coverage everywhere I go.
And let's not forget that AT&amp;T's going to provide adequate coverage for 90+\% of the population anyway, even if they do get spotty in rural areas.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788737</id>
	<title>Droid and Lucsfilm?</title>
	<author>josh6179</author>
	<datestamp>1255876920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I noticed during the commercial and from the website that "Droid" is licensed from Lucasfilm?  I didn't realized they owned a trademark for that term.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I noticed during the commercial and from the website that " Droid " is licensed from Lucasfilm ?
I did n't realized they owned a trademark for that term .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I noticed during the commercial and from the website that "Droid" is licensed from Lucasfilm?
I didn't realized they owned a trademark for that term.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784483</id>
	<title>Re:What is the attraction to the iphone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255883280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not surprised that you say the applications were all irrelevant.  If you just want a phone for a phone, then the iPhone is probably not your best choice, not by any measure.  Almost all of the applications are 'like to haves' instead of 'must haves'.  I can't really think of any apps that are 'must haves'.</p><p>And the texting is clunky at best and can never be as good as a good tactile keypad.</p><p>Quite frankly, and I have a new 3GS, I have reservations about getting an iPhone as my next mobile.</p><p>Here's a couple gripes:</p><p>- I despise iTunes.  If it had a less bloated interface then I'd be much happier, but as it is, the interface is my main gripe.  It's unresponsive and annoying.</p><p>- Apple software updates are a mixed bag.  If you aren't careful you can brick your device pretty easily.  I tried updating from work and our firewall denied Apple's servers some kind of connection... the result was a bricked device.  I can't imagine why I have to use the internet in the process of a firmware upgrade.  I should be able to just download the firmware upgrade and install it without having to hope I don't lose my connection in the middle and wind up with a device that has to be restored from a backup.</p><p>All said, the iPhone is not a must have.  It's a luxury item.  You can easily get another smart phone for much, much cheaper without a service contract and save yourself quite a large sum of money in the process.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not surprised that you say the applications were all irrelevant .
If you just want a phone for a phone , then the iPhone is probably not your best choice , not by any measure .
Almost all of the applications are 'like to haves ' instead of 'must haves' .
I ca n't really think of any apps that are 'must haves'.And the texting is clunky at best and can never be as good as a good tactile keypad.Quite frankly , and I have a new 3GS , I have reservations about getting an iPhone as my next mobile.Here 's a couple gripes : - I despise iTunes .
If it had a less bloated interface then I 'd be much happier , but as it is , the interface is my main gripe .
It 's unresponsive and annoying.- Apple software updates are a mixed bag .
If you are n't careful you can brick your device pretty easily .
I tried updating from work and our firewall denied Apple 's servers some kind of connection... the result was a bricked device .
I ca n't imagine why I have to use the internet in the process of a firmware upgrade .
I should be able to just download the firmware upgrade and install it without having to hope I do n't lose my connection in the middle and wind up with a device that has to be restored from a backup.All said , the iPhone is not a must have .
It 's a luxury item .
You can easily get another smart phone for much , much cheaper without a service contract and save yourself quite a large sum of money in the process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not surprised that you say the applications were all irrelevant.
If you just want a phone for a phone, then the iPhone is probably not your best choice, not by any measure.
Almost all of the applications are 'like to haves' instead of 'must haves'.
I can't really think of any apps that are 'must haves'.And the texting is clunky at best and can never be as good as a good tactile keypad.Quite frankly, and I have a new 3GS, I have reservations about getting an iPhone as my next mobile.Here's a couple gripes:- I despise iTunes.
If it had a less bloated interface then I'd be much happier, but as it is, the interface is my main gripe.
It's unresponsive and annoying.- Apple software updates are a mixed bag.
If you aren't careful you can brick your device pretty easily.
I tried updating from work and our firewall denied Apple's servers some kind of connection... the result was a bricked device.
I can't imagine why I have to use the internet in the process of a firmware upgrade.
I should be able to just download the firmware upgrade and install it without having to hope I don't lose my connection in the middle and wind up with a device that has to be restored from a backup.All said, the iPhone is not a must have.
It's a luxury item.
You can easily get another smart phone for much, much cheaper without a service contract and save yourself quite a large sum of money in the process.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783791</id>
	<title>Re:Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>moosesocks</author>
	<datestamp>1255876740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sorry, but we've heard "this is the iPod killer" too often and it's the exact same song and dance as this new round of "this is the iPhone killer."</p></div><p>I feel your pain, and am not expecting any miracles.</p><p>HOWEVER, Verizon currently has (by far) the best network in the US, and has perpetually lacked any decent phones in its lineup.  I like my eNV2, although it's honestly nothing special.  From all indications, Android phones are pretty nice, which means that Verizon will at the very least sell quite a few to people (such as myself) who live in areas where AT&amp;T, T-Mobile, or Sprint simply don't provide an acceptable level of coverage.</p><p>That said, Verizon's customer support appears to be run by a consortium of Vogons and Klingons, while the iPhone and Pre still have a better OS than Android.  I've honestly never witnessed a company that seems to passionately <i>despise</i> its customers as much as Verizon Wireless does.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , but we 've heard " this is the iPod killer " too often and it 's the exact same song and dance as this new round of " this is the iPhone killer .
" I feel your pain , and am not expecting any miracles.HOWEVER , Verizon currently has ( by far ) the best network in the US , and has perpetually lacked any decent phones in its lineup .
I like my eNV2 , although it 's honestly nothing special .
From all indications , Android phones are pretty nice , which means that Verizon will at the very least sell quite a few to people ( such as myself ) who live in areas where AT&amp;T , T-Mobile , or Sprint simply do n't provide an acceptable level of coverage.That said , Verizon 's customer support appears to be run by a consortium of Vogons and Klingons , while the iPhone and Pre still have a better OS than Android .
I 've honestly never witnessed a company that seems to passionately despise its customers as much as Verizon Wireless does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, but we've heard "this is the iPod killer" too often and it's the exact same song and dance as this new round of "this is the iPhone killer.
"I feel your pain, and am not expecting any miracles.HOWEVER, Verizon currently has (by far) the best network in the US, and has perpetually lacked any decent phones in its lineup.
I like my eNV2, although it's honestly nothing special.
From all indications, Android phones are pretty nice, which means that Verizon will at the very least sell quite a few to people (such as myself) who live in areas where AT&amp;T, T-Mobile, or Sprint simply don't provide an acceptable level of coverage.That said, Verizon's customer support appears to be run by a consortium of Vogons and Klingons, while the iPhone and Pre still have a better OS than Android.
I've honestly never witnessed a company that seems to passionately despise its customers as much as Verizon Wireless does.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786703</id>
	<title>This could be the phone I have been waiting for</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1255858680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reading the specs, this could be the phone I have been waiting for. It has a keyboard (message/appointment/etc. entry), it is hackable (512 MB ROM, 256 MB RAM, and I recently read you \_can\_ write native apps for Android), standard interfaces (USB, WLAN), plenty of battery time, a fast CPU, it's all there. As a bonus, it runs Linux!</p><p>I'm curious what it will cost in Europe<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading the specs , this could be the phone I have been waiting for .
It has a keyboard ( message/appointment/etc .
entry ) , it is hackable ( 512 MB ROM , 256 MB RAM , and I recently read you \ _can \ _ write native apps for Android ) , standard interfaces ( USB , WLAN ) , plenty of battery time , a fast CPU , it 's all there .
As a bonus , it runs Linux ! I 'm curious what it will cost in Europe .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading the specs, this could be the phone I have been waiting for.
It has a keyboard (message/appointment/etc.
entry), it is hackable (512 MB ROM, 256 MB RAM, and I recently read you \_can\_ write native apps for Android), standard interfaces (USB, WLAN), plenty of battery time, a fast CPU, it's all there.
As a bonus, it runs Linux!I'm curious what it will cost in Europe ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783759</id>
	<title>But</title>
	<author>dagamer34</author>
	<datestamp>1255876500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The best way to challenge the iPhone is to not bill your phone as "the iPhone killer". Just let the phone do what it does best and people will eventually notice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The best way to challenge the iPhone is to not bill your phone as " the iPhone killer " .
Just let the phone do what it does best and people will eventually notice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best way to challenge the iPhone is to not bill your phone as "the iPhone killer".
Just let the phone do what it does best and people will eventually notice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29793401</id>
	<title>One Person's Take</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255963980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BFD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BFD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BFD.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785509</id>
	<title>Re:What is the attraction to the iphone?</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1255892940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then you've obviously never owned or used an iPhone. The firmware updates are downloaded before the install initiates. Any user of an iphone could tell you this as it's very obvious when it's downloading. Your phone is still fully functional. It also won't install a 'partial' update. You can also just download the update and install it manually if you choose. There are instructions all over the net. There are also means to simply install your old firmware, even with a 'bricked' iphone, also all over the net by putting it into recovery mode</p><p>As to iTunes being 'bloated'. Lets see.. it has a menu on the left, and columns on the right, all of which you can turn on and off at will. The left frame contains basic navigation,a and the right contains song lists. Exactly how minimal are you wanting?</p><p>Your idea of 'bloated' seems confused. If you're going to slam software, you should at least possibly try it first. You were doing better by calling it annoying as I've run it on very old hardware and have had no response issues. At least with annoying you could say 'I don't like this software because X, Y, and Z" and it would be perfectly valid for you to do so since your opinion is important to you as are your likes and dislikes. Simply stating you 'hate' it is valid. Stating it's 'bloated' and slow when it's obviously not, even on an old single core processor, smacks of trolling. Frankly you sound like a troll who simply hates Apple without any concrete experience with their products.</p><p>My iTunes is currently open with about 8GB of music. It takes up 48MB of ram, and 0.0 CPU cycles according to my activity monitor. While playing an AAC audio file, it uses 3.5 \% CPU. I would not consider this bloated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then you 've obviously never owned or used an iPhone .
The firmware updates are downloaded before the install initiates .
Any user of an iphone could tell you this as it 's very obvious when it 's downloading .
Your phone is still fully functional .
It also wo n't install a 'partial ' update .
You can also just download the update and install it manually if you choose .
There are instructions all over the net .
There are also means to simply install your old firmware , even with a 'bricked ' iphone , also all over the net by putting it into recovery modeAs to iTunes being 'bloated' .
Lets see.. it has a menu on the left , and columns on the right , all of which you can turn on and off at will .
The left frame contains basic navigation,a and the right contains song lists .
Exactly how minimal are you wanting ? Your idea of 'bloated ' seems confused .
If you 're going to slam software , you should at least possibly try it first .
You were doing better by calling it annoying as I 've run it on very old hardware and have had no response issues .
At least with annoying you could say 'I do n't like this software because X , Y , and Z " and it would be perfectly valid for you to do so since your opinion is important to you as are your likes and dislikes .
Simply stating you 'hate ' it is valid .
Stating it 's 'bloated ' and slow when it 's obviously not , even on an old single core processor , smacks of trolling .
Frankly you sound like a troll who simply hates Apple without any concrete experience with their products.My iTunes is currently open with about 8GB of music .
It takes up 48MB of ram , and 0.0 CPU cycles according to my activity monitor .
While playing an AAC audio file , it uses 3.5 \ % CPU .
I would not consider this bloated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then you've obviously never owned or used an iPhone.
The firmware updates are downloaded before the install initiates.
Any user of an iphone could tell you this as it's very obvious when it's downloading.
Your phone is still fully functional.
It also won't install a 'partial' update.
You can also just download the update and install it manually if you choose.
There are instructions all over the net.
There are also means to simply install your old firmware, even with a 'bricked' iphone, also all over the net by putting it into recovery modeAs to iTunes being 'bloated'.
Lets see.. it has a menu on the left, and columns on the right, all of which you can turn on and off at will.
The left frame contains basic navigation,a and the right contains song lists.
Exactly how minimal are you wanting?Your idea of 'bloated' seems confused.
If you're going to slam software, you should at least possibly try it first.
You were doing better by calling it annoying as I've run it on very old hardware and have had no response issues.
At least with annoying you could say 'I don't like this software because X, Y, and Z" and it would be perfectly valid for you to do so since your opinion is important to you as are your likes and dislikes.
Simply stating you 'hate' it is valid.
Stating it's 'bloated' and slow when it's obviously not, even on an old single core processor, smacks of trolling.
Frankly you sound like a troll who simply hates Apple without any concrete experience with their products.My iTunes is currently open with about 8GB of music.
It takes up 48MB of ram, and 0.0 CPU cycles according to my activity monitor.
While playing an AAC audio file, it uses 3.5 \% CPU.
I would not consider this bloated.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784483</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29804467</id>
	<title>Re:verizon network, no thanks</title>
	<author>TimboJones</author>
	<datestamp>1255978200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Find the network that is best in your area first, then pick a phone.</p></div></blockquote><p>There is certainly merit to this suggestion, but also be aware that the phone hardware does have a significant effect on effective signal strength, and especially on the quality of the audio during a call.  For me, at least one past phone upgrade provided an immediately noticeable improvement on signal strength due (I assume) to a more receptive antenna.  Other phone upgrades have improved consistency and clarity of audio.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Find the network that is best in your area first , then pick a phone.There is certainly merit to this suggestion , but also be aware that the phone hardware does have a significant effect on effective signal strength , and especially on the quality of the audio during a call .
For me , at least one past phone upgrade provided an immediately noticeable improvement on signal strength due ( I assume ) to a more receptive antenna .
Other phone upgrades have improved consistency and clarity of audio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Find the network that is best in your area first, then pick a phone.There is certainly merit to this suggestion, but also be aware that the phone hardware does have a significant effect on effective signal strength, and especially on the quality of the audio during a call.
For me, at least one past phone upgrade provided an immediately noticeable improvement on signal strength due (I assume) to a more receptive antenna.
Other phone upgrades have improved consistency and clarity of audio.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784041</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255876680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. Since when does a US carrier "add value" in any sense of the word? All the US carriers do is cripple the phone hardware (disabling tethering, MMS, etc) and lock-in their customers. Glad I live in Europe where I'm free to choose the phone hardware and service independently, and the phones are not crippled. And I pay a reasonable amount when roaming in other countries and calls rarely get dropped. Oh yeah... that's called service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
Since when does a US carrier " add value " in any sense of the word ?
All the US carriers do is cripple the phone hardware ( disabling tethering , MMS , etc ) and lock-in their customers .
Glad I live in Europe where I 'm free to choose the phone hardware and service independently , and the phones are not crippled .
And I pay a reasonable amount when roaming in other countries and calls rarely get dropped .
Oh yeah... that 's called service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
Since when does a US carrier "add value" in any sense of the word?
All the US carriers do is cripple the phone hardware (disabling tethering, MMS, etc) and lock-in their customers.
Glad I live in Europe where I'm free to choose the phone hardware and service independently, and the phones are not crippled.
And I pay a reasonable amount when roaming in other countries and calls rarely get dropped.
Oh yeah... that's called service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784041</id>
	<title>verizon network, no thanks</title>
	<author>zhevek</author>
	<datestamp>1255879260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had Verizon for near 10 years.  However, this last summer I switched to AT&amp;T because verizon's network was dropping my calls in my apartment half the time or more.  And this is just 2 miles outside of downtown Portland, Or.  Haven't had a dropped call on my iPhone on AT&amp;T yet.</p><p>So just remember that strength of network is not "national", because most people don't move around all the time.  Find the network that is best in your area first, then pick a phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had Verizon for near 10 years .
However , this last summer I switched to AT&amp;T because verizon 's network was dropping my calls in my apartment half the time or more .
And this is just 2 miles outside of downtown Portland , Or .
Have n't had a dropped call on my iPhone on AT&amp;T yet.So just remember that strength of network is not " national " , because most people do n't move around all the time .
Find the network that is best in your area first , then pick a phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had Verizon for near 10 years.
However, this last summer I switched to AT&amp;T because verizon's network was dropping my calls in my apartment half the time or more.
And this is just 2 miles outside of downtown Portland, Or.
Haven't had a dropped call on my iPhone on AT&amp;T yet.So just remember that strength of network is not "national", because most people don't move around all the time.
Find the network that is best in your area first, then pick a phone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735</id>
	<title>Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1255876200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just like all the companies that came out with "the iPod Killer", companies (like Verizon here) just don't get it. It's not about coming out with the "most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint." The iPhone wasn't the most sophisticated mobile device from a hardware standpoint when it came out. It's not about the hardware. Yes, the hardware can make several things really stand out but it's about the user experience. Companies continually ignore and overlook that aspect of it and that is why this phone will be cool and mobile geeks will sing its praises but it will not be a serious threat to the iPhone - it's not focusing on the right things.<br> <br>
Sorry, but we've heard "this is the iPod killer" too often and it's the exact same song and dance as this new round of "this is the iPhone killer."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like all the companies that came out with " the iPod Killer " , companies ( like Verizon here ) just do n't get it .
It 's not about coming out with the " most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint .
" The iPhone was n't the most sophisticated mobile device from a hardware standpoint when it came out .
It 's not about the hardware .
Yes , the hardware can make several things really stand out but it 's about the user experience .
Companies continually ignore and overlook that aspect of it and that is why this phone will be cool and mobile geeks will sing its praises but it will not be a serious threat to the iPhone - it 's not focusing on the right things .
Sorry , but we 've heard " this is the iPod killer " too often and it 's the exact same song and dance as this new round of " this is the iPhone killer .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like all the companies that came out with "the iPod Killer", companies (like Verizon here) just don't get it.
It's not about coming out with the "most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint.
" The iPhone wasn't the most sophisticated mobile device from a hardware standpoint when it came out.
It's not about the hardware.
Yes, the hardware can make several things really stand out but it's about the user experience.
Companies continually ignore and overlook that aspect of it and that is why this phone will be cool and mobile geeks will sing its praises but it will not be a serious threat to the iPhone - it's not focusing on the right things.
Sorry, but we've heard "this is the iPod killer" too often and it's the exact same song and dance as this new round of "this is the iPhone killer.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783911</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255878000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh look! Another iPhone killer! This one will succeed, trust me!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh look !
Another iPhone killer !
This one will succeed , trust me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh look!
Another iPhone killer!
This one will succeed, trust me!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29796603</id>
	<title>But will it be better than...</title>
	<author>kindbud</author>
	<datestamp>1255977300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...an iPod touch with a Verizon MiFi?</p><p>Kinda hard to beat having-cake-and-eating-it-too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...an iPod touch with a Verizon MiFi ? Kinda hard to beat having-cake-and-eating-it-too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...an iPod touch with a Verizon MiFi?Kinda hard to beat having-cake-and-eating-it-too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784549</id>
	<title>Remember the iPod Killers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255883880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For nearly four straight years, every feature stuffed non Apple mp3 player was the "iPod Killer". Turns out the only true iPod Killer was the iPhone. At least they have the good sense to call this a "challenger" and not a "killer". And Microsofties can always dream about how the Pink would have killed the iPhone, I guess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For nearly four straight years , every feature stuffed non Apple mp3 player was the " iPod Killer " .
Turns out the only true iPod Killer was the iPhone .
At least they have the good sense to call this a " challenger " and not a " killer " .
And Microsofties can always dream about how the Pink would have killed the iPhone , I guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For nearly four straight years, every feature stuffed non Apple mp3 player was the "iPod Killer".
Turns out the only true iPod Killer was the iPhone.
At least they have the good sense to call this a "challenger" and not a "killer".
And Microsofties can always dream about how the Pink would have killed the iPhone, I guess.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784703</id>
	<title>There's an app for that</title>
	<author>RazorSharp</author>
	<datestamp>1255885380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>on the iPhone app store. Don't you pay attention to advertising?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>on the iPhone app store .
Do n't you pay attention to advertising ?
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>on the iPhone app store.
Don't you pay attention to advertising?
:P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784839</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255886760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I went another way with that quote:  Oh, it could have been a challenger except that it wasn't on a good network and the hardware wasn't great?  Really?  Well, my old Nokia could have been a challenger, except for that part about not being a smartphone and having no data capabilities.  I also made a phone out of cardboard, and it could have been a challenger except for the fact that it didn't work at all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I went another way with that quote : Oh , it could have been a challenger except that it was n't on a good network and the hardware was n't great ?
Really ? Well , my old Nokia could have been a challenger , except for that part about not being a smartphone and having no data capabilities .
I also made a phone out of cardboard , and it could have been a challenger except for the fact that it did n't work at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went another way with that quote:  Oh, it could have been a challenger except that it wasn't on a good network and the hardware wasn't great?
Really?  Well, my old Nokia could have been a challenger, except for that part about not being a smartphone and having no data capabilities.
I also made a phone out of cardboard, and it could have been a challenger except for the fact that it didn't work at all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788569</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>PJ Kix</author>
	<datestamp>1255875000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>consider the source of the summary which was blatantly ripped from <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/18/verizon-droid-is-the-real-deal/" title="techcrunch.com" rel="nofollow">techcrunch and micheal arrogent</a> [techcrunch.com]<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... take with a giant grain of salt</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>consider the source of the summary which was blatantly ripped from techcrunch and micheal arrogent [ techcrunch.com ] ... take with a giant grain of salt</tokentext>
<sentencetext>consider the source of the summary which was blatantly ripped from techcrunch and micheal arrogent [techcrunch.com] ... take with a giant grain of salt</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29803151</id>
	<title>Re:But</title>
	<author>welshsocialist</author>
	<datestamp>1255964400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I <i>really</i> agree with this post. When I was shopping for a replacement for my Creative NOMAD II in 2004-05, I was amazed by how much Apple's competitors were trying to out iPod the iPod. The worst of these was Creative. Their Zen Micro line was a dead ringer for the iPod, interface wise. This seems to still be the case all of these years later. In short, if these companies want to get folks out of the iWorld, they need to step up their game and not try to out iPhone the iPhone. Only time will tell if this happens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really agree with this post .
When I was shopping for a replacement for my Creative NOMAD II in 2004-05 , I was amazed by how much Apple 's competitors were trying to out iPod the iPod .
The worst of these was Creative .
Their Zen Micro line was a dead ringer for the iPod , interface wise .
This seems to still be the case all of these years later .
In short , if these companies want to get folks out of the iWorld , they need to step up their game and not try to out iPhone the iPhone .
Only time will tell if this happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really agree with this post.
When I was shopping for a replacement for my Creative NOMAD II in 2004-05, I was amazed by how much Apple's competitors were trying to out iPod the iPod.
The worst of these was Creative.
Their Zen Micro line was a dead ringer for the iPod, interface wise.
This seems to still be the case all of these years later.
In short, if these companies want to get folks out of the iWorld, they need to step up their game and not try to out iPhone the iPhone.
Only time will tell if this happens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29793953</id>
	<title>Re:verizon network, no thanks</title>
	<author>Shea, Tim</author>
	<datestamp>1255966320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't wait until the day when I can pick any phone and then pick any network.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't wait until the day when I can pick any phone and then pick any network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't wait until the day when I can pick any phone and then pick any network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784041</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783827</id>
	<title>unfortunately...</title>
	<author>buddyglass</author>
	<datestamp>1255877100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the engadget page l inked from the WaPo article is accurate, then the phone is butt ugly.  Meaning it won't lure away most iPhone users, who, as a group, tend to actually value style and ergonomics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the engadget page l inked from the WaPo article is accurate , then the phone is butt ugly .
Meaning it wo n't lure away most iPhone users , who , as a group , tend to actually value style and ergonomics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the engadget page l inked from the WaPo article is accurate, then the phone is butt ugly.
Meaning it won't lure away most iPhone users, who, as a group, tend to actually value style and ergonomics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784529</id>
	<title>Re:What is the attraction to the iphone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255883760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>All 100,000?</p><p>I'm curious to know what it was you were looking for that didn't exist.</p></div><p>Google Voice</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All 100,000 ? I 'm curious to know what it was you were looking for that did n't exist.Google Voice</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All 100,000?I'm curious to know what it was you were looking for that didn't exist.Google Voice
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789401</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>bwschulz</author>
	<datestamp>1255883040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm in almost the same exact situation as you, but I've got a bit more to go in my contract being able to leave Sprint without penalty. I wonder how many of us there are- could we get a petition  together or something? I'd really rather get a Pre and stay on Sprint than have to go with an iPhone. Maybe Verizon will be more reasonable when they get the Pre...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm in almost the same exact situation as you , but I 've got a bit more to go in my contract being able to leave Sprint without penalty .
I wonder how many of us there are- could we get a petition together or something ?
I 'd really rather get a Pre and stay on Sprint than have to go with an iPhone .
Maybe Verizon will be more reasonable when they get the Pre.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm in almost the same exact situation as you, but I've got a bit more to go in my contract being able to leave Sprint without penalty.
I wonder how many of us there are- could we get a petition  together or something?
I'd really rather get a Pre and stay on Sprint than have to go with an iPhone.
Maybe Verizon will be more reasonable when they get the Pre...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786039</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255896840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Since when does a US carrier "add value" in any sense of the word?</p></div><p>AT&amp;T did "add value" with the iPhone, by implementing visual voicemail.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when does a US carrier " add value " in any sense of the word ? AT&amp;T did " add value " with the iPhone , by implementing visual voicemail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when does a US carrier "add value" in any sense of the word?AT&amp;T did "add value" with the iPhone, by implementing visual voicemail.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784619</id>
	<title>Um...US != world</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255884600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So it's an iPhone killer...from Verizon...and it's gonna kill iPhone as a product...and it's from Verizon.<br>You Americans never cease to amaze me...sorry for shouting but; THE REST OF THE WORLD DOESN'T HAVE VERIZON!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So it 's an iPhone killer...from Verizon...and it 's gon na kill iPhone as a product...and it 's from Verizon.You Americans never cease to amaze me...sorry for shouting but ; THE REST OF THE WORLD DOES N'T HAVE VERIZON !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it's an iPhone killer...from Verizon...and it's gonna kill iPhone as a product...and it's from Verizon.You Americans never cease to amaze me...sorry for shouting but; THE REST OF THE WORLD DOESN'T HAVE VERIZON!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784073</id>
	<title>Re:What is the attraction to the iphone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255879620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> Its applications were all irrelevant to me </i></p><p>All 100,000?</p><p>I'm curious to know what it was you were looking for that didn't exist.</p><p>The iphone isn't 'must have', but its certainly nice to have- which isn't something I can say about any 'smart' phone previously. I haven't used android- maybe it is/will be better, but the iphone is already very good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its applications were all irrelevant to me All 100,000 ? I 'm curious to know what it was you were looking for that did n't exist.The iphone is n't 'must have ' , but its certainly nice to have- which is n't something I can say about any 'smart ' phone previously .
I have n't used android- maybe it is/will be better , but the iphone is already very good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Its applications were all irrelevant to me All 100,000?I'm curious to know what it was you were looking for that didn't exist.The iphone isn't 'must have', but its certainly nice to have- which isn't something I can say about any 'smart' phone previously.
I haven't used android- maybe it is/will be better, but the iphone is already very good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797809</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>jschottm</author>
	<datestamp>1255981860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I've never heard of ANYONE complaining about the Pre due to its network.</i></p><p>I strongly considered the Pre (or another smartphone on the Sprint network) recently but decided against it because I live in a small college town with limited Sprint coverage.  Specifically, I know people who are on Sprint who can't get signal inside buildings on campus or in my home.  Whereas my local CDMA provider covers both of them quite well and has excellent roaming agreements for when I'm not in the region.</p><p><i>But, you can't hate the phone because of the network.</i></p><p>You can hate the manufacturer for making exclusivity deals with networks that don't meet your needs.  The iPhone and HTC Android phones are out of my consideration because GSM coverage is still insufficient for my needs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never heard of ANYONE complaining about the Pre due to its network.I strongly considered the Pre ( or another smartphone on the Sprint network ) recently but decided against it because I live in a small college town with limited Sprint coverage .
Specifically , I know people who are on Sprint who ca n't get signal inside buildings on campus or in my home .
Whereas my local CDMA provider covers both of them quite well and has excellent roaming agreements for when I 'm not in the region.But , you ca n't hate the phone because of the network.You can hate the manufacturer for making exclusivity deals with networks that do n't meet your needs .
The iPhone and HTC Android phones are out of my consideration because GSM coverage is still insufficient for my needs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never heard of ANYONE complaining about the Pre due to its network.I strongly considered the Pre (or another smartphone on the Sprint network) recently but decided against it because I live in a small college town with limited Sprint coverage.
Specifically, I know people who are on Sprint who can't get signal inside buildings on campus or in my home.
Whereas my local CDMA provider covers both of them quite well and has excellent roaming agreements for when I'm not in the region.But, you can't hate the phone because of the network.You can hate the manufacturer for making exclusivity deals with networks that don't meet your needs.
The iPhone and HTC Android phones are out of my consideration because GSM coverage is still insufficient for my needs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784989</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784113</id>
	<title>Re:IPhone. Blah Blah Blah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255879920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I heard the battery doesn't last more than a day?<br>I prefer my phone dumb. And I prefer it to last at least a week.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I heard the battery does n't last more than a day ? I prefer my phone dumb .
And I prefer it to last at least a week .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heard the battery doesn't last more than a day?I prefer my phone dumb.
And I prefer it to last at least a week.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785025</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255888740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>From a hardware standpoint, the Pre is pretty impressive</p></div><p>Except that it is made out of plastic and it flexes, so it feels flexy and looks cheap next to the aluminum and glass iPhone.  Not knocking it, that is just a lot of peoples' complaints.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>But it failed because 'it lacked the Verizon network'?  What is this supposed to mean?</p></div><p>Verizon and AT&amp;T are the largest US mobile carriers in the US in terms of numbers of subscribers (around 60 million).  Sprint is a few million people behind and some of their former customers are still annoyed with their customer service.  Verizon is also owned by Vodaphone, which has a much larger international market presence.     </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From a hardware standpoint , the Pre is pretty impressiveExcept that it is made out of plastic and it flexes , so it feels flexy and looks cheap next to the aluminum and glass iPhone .
Not knocking it , that is just a lot of peoples ' complaints.But it failed because 'it lacked the Verizon network ' ?
What is this supposed to mean ? Verizon and AT&amp;T are the largest US mobile carriers in the US in terms of numbers of subscribers ( around 60 million ) .
Sprint is a few million people behind and some of their former customers are still annoyed with their customer service .
Verizon is also owned by Vodaphone , which has a much larger international market presence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a hardware standpoint, the Pre is pretty impressiveExcept that it is made out of plastic and it flexes, so it feels flexy and looks cheap next to the aluminum and glass iPhone.
Not knocking it, that is just a lot of peoples' complaints.But it failed because 'it lacked the Verizon network'?
What is this supposed to mean?Verizon and AT&amp;T are the largest US mobile carriers in the US in terms of numbers of subscribers (around 60 million).
Sprint is a few million people behind and some of their former customers are still annoyed with their customer service.
Verizon is also owned by Vodaphone, which has a much larger international market presence.     
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789107</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255880940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I for one hate the iPhone for one reason only - it is on the AT&amp;T network<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one hate the iPhone for one reason only - it is on the AT&amp;T network .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one hate the iPhone for one reason only - it is on the AT&amp;T network ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784989</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788833</id>
	<title>The "article" is actually an ad !!</title>
	<author>Smurf</author>
	<datestamp>1255877880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought the article looked weird, visually different from other Wash Post articles (e.g., much larger font). So I took a closer look.</p><p>Go to the sixth paragraph. The one starting with "The Droid poses a different and more significant challenge...". Look at the left margin. <b>What do you see?</b></p><p>A word in blue, written vertically:<b> "Advertisement"</b></p><p>That is not a real article by Michael Arrington of TechCrunch.com, <b>it is an ad</b> commissioned to him. The difference is that he is being payed to say whatever the sponsors want him to say.</p><p>Although sleazy this is legal because to the observant reader it is clear that it is not a typical article from that publication, and, heck, it even says openly that it is an Advertisement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the article looked weird , visually different from other Wash Post articles ( e.g. , much larger font ) .
So I took a closer look.Go to the sixth paragraph .
The one starting with " The Droid poses a different and more significant challenge... " .
Look at the left margin .
What do you see ? A word in blue , written vertically : " Advertisement " That is not a real article by Michael Arrington of TechCrunch.com , it is an ad commissioned to him .
The difference is that he is being payed to say whatever the sponsors want him to say.Although sleazy this is legal because to the observant reader it is clear that it is not a typical article from that publication , and , heck , it even says openly that it is an Advertisement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the article looked weird, visually different from other Wash Post articles (e.g., much larger font).
So I took a closer look.Go to the sixth paragraph.
The one starting with "The Droid poses a different and more significant challenge...".
Look at the left margin.
What do you see?A word in blue, written vertically: "Advertisement"That is not a real article by Michael Arrington of TechCrunch.com, it is an ad commissioned to him.
The difference is that he is being payed to say whatever the sponsors want him to say.Although sleazy this is legal because to the observant reader it is clear that it is not a typical article from that publication, and, heck, it even says openly that it is an Advertisement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29791415</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255947300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I'm still missing some apps, but I'm sure my app needs are being met."</p><p>How are you any better than the voice?  Aside from overuse of caps and anonymous posting, of course.  I mean, it looks like an SEO spam entry.</p><p>Posted AC for irony.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 'm still missing some apps , but I 'm sure my app needs are being met .
" How are you any better than the voice ?
Aside from overuse of caps and anonymous posting , of course .
I mean , it looks like an SEO spam entry.Posted AC for irony .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I'm still missing some apps, but I'm sure my app needs are being met.
"How are you any better than the voice?
Aside from overuse of caps and anonymous posting, of course.
I mean, it looks like an SEO spam entry.Posted AC for irony.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785001</id>
	<title>Re:What is the attraction to the iphone?</title>
	<author>meta-monkey</author>
	<datestamp>1255888380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The iPhone makes my life easier than any other phone I've seen.
<br> <br>
For me it's a "must have" because it's simple, easy to use, and does everything I need it to.  Email is easy, calendar sync is easy, web browsing is easy.  I use Mac desktops and laptops, so syncing is simple with my iTunes library.
<br> <br>
So, it handles all the phone/email/web/contacts/calendar/music/video stuff I need, and then still lets me play Civilization Revolution and read Kindle eBooks.
<br> <br>
I'm sure lots of these other things can be done on other smart phones, but before the iPhone, they were cumbersome and difficult to do. The iPhone made these tasks intuitive, even to laymen.  It's not that I'm dumb or technically illiterate (I've got a master's in electrical engineering), I'm just really, really busy and don't have time to hack my phone to get it to sync with my mail accounts or search 15 different websites to find an app that will tell me sunrise/sunset times.
<br> <br>
I don't care about the hardware.  I'm not folding proteins on my phone.  I do care about the software and the interface, which is where the iPhone shines, and where Verizon screwed up on their commercial here.  They're hyping it as an iPhone killer because it has better hardware.  Um, people don't use an iPhone because of the hardware, they use it because of the software.  Therefore, while I'm sure the phone will do well amongst other android or blackberry users, it's not going to make a dent in the iPhone market until you can show me a commercial that explains how this phone makes my life easier than the iPhone.  That's the whole point of the "there's an app for that" commercials.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The iPhone makes my life easier than any other phone I 've seen .
For me it 's a " must have " because it 's simple , easy to use , and does everything I need it to .
Email is easy , calendar sync is easy , web browsing is easy .
I use Mac desktops and laptops , so syncing is simple with my iTunes library .
So , it handles all the phone/email/web/contacts/calendar/music/video stuff I need , and then still lets me play Civilization Revolution and read Kindle eBooks .
I 'm sure lots of these other things can be done on other smart phones , but before the iPhone , they were cumbersome and difficult to do .
The iPhone made these tasks intuitive , even to laymen .
It 's not that I 'm dumb or technically illiterate ( I 've got a master 's in electrical engineering ) , I 'm just really , really busy and do n't have time to hack my phone to get it to sync with my mail accounts or search 15 different websites to find an app that will tell me sunrise/sunset times .
I do n't care about the hardware .
I 'm not folding proteins on my phone .
I do care about the software and the interface , which is where the iPhone shines , and where Verizon screwed up on their commercial here .
They 're hyping it as an iPhone killer because it has better hardware .
Um , people do n't use an iPhone because of the hardware , they use it because of the software .
Therefore , while I 'm sure the phone will do well amongst other android or blackberry users , it 's not going to make a dent in the iPhone market until you can show me a commercial that explains how this phone makes my life easier than the iPhone .
That 's the whole point of the " there 's an app for that " commercials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iPhone makes my life easier than any other phone I've seen.
For me it's a "must have" because it's simple, easy to use, and does everything I need it to.
Email is easy, calendar sync is easy, web browsing is easy.
I use Mac desktops and laptops, so syncing is simple with my iTunes library.
So, it handles all the phone/email/web/contacts/calendar/music/video stuff I need, and then still lets me play Civilization Revolution and read Kindle eBooks.
I'm sure lots of these other things can be done on other smart phones, but before the iPhone, they were cumbersome and difficult to do.
The iPhone made these tasks intuitive, even to laymen.
It's not that I'm dumb or technically illiterate (I've got a master's in electrical engineering), I'm just really, really busy and don't have time to hack my phone to get it to sync with my mail accounts or search 15 different websites to find an app that will tell me sunrise/sunset times.
I don't care about the hardware.
I'm not folding proteins on my phone.
I do care about the software and the interface, which is where the iPhone shines, and where Verizon screwed up on their commercial here.
They're hyping it as an iPhone killer because it has better hardware.
Um, people don't use an iPhone because of the hardware, they use it because of the software.
Therefore, while I'm sure the phone will do well amongst other android or blackberry users, it's not going to make a dent in the iPhone market until you can show me a commercial that explains how this phone makes my life easier than the iPhone.
That's the whole point of the "there's an app for that" commercials.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784093</id>
	<title>LucasArts Will Call In The Lawyers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255879740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Over the use of 'Droid'. Already happened to Battletech (Battledroids).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Over the use of 'Droid' .
Already happened to Battletech ( Battledroids ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over the use of 'Droid'.
Already happened to Battletech (Battledroids).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29793077</id>
	<title>My succinct reply would be</title>
	<author>intheshelter</author>
	<datestamp>1255962540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Shit in one hand and wish in the other.  See which one fills up first."</p><p>I doubt this will sway very many people away from the iPhone.  The iPhone is already an iconic brand.  Just "catching up" won't be enough to turn anyone's eye.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Shit in one hand and wish in the other .
See which one fills up first .
" I doubt this will sway very many people away from the iPhone .
The iPhone is already an iconic brand .
Just " catching up " wo n't be enough to turn anyone 's eye .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Shit in one hand and wish in the other.
See which one fills up first.
"I doubt this will sway very many people away from the iPhone.
The iPhone is already an iconic brand.
Just "catching up" won't be enough to turn anyone's eye.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785175</id>
	<title>Re:Remember the iPod Killers?</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1255889880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>True.  This might have more of a chance though.  The iPhone hasn't quite saturated the market yet.  There are plenty of potential customers who aren't locked in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>True .
This might have more of a chance though .
The iPhone has n't quite saturated the market yet .
There are plenty of potential customers who are n't locked in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True.
This might have more of a chance though.
The iPhone hasn't quite saturated the market yet.
There are plenty of potential customers who aren't locked in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783869</id>
	<title>On the subject of "iPhone killer"</title>
	<author>Tibor the Hun</author>
	<datestamp>1255877520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if Verizon doesn't refer to it as the iPhone killer, all the pundits and bloggers hungry for pagehits, will. This only helps advertise iPhone and is detrimental to Verizon phone's introduction. (Notice that no one is talking about the new "Windows phone" either.)</p><p>(posted from an iPhone)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if Verizon does n't refer to it as the iPhone killer , all the pundits and bloggers hungry for pagehits , will .
This only helps advertise iPhone and is detrimental to Verizon phone 's introduction .
( Notice that no one is talking about the new " Windows phone " either .
) ( posted from an iPhone )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if Verizon doesn't refer to it as the iPhone killer, all the pundits and bloggers hungry for pagehits, will.
This only helps advertise iPhone and is detrimental to Verizon phone's introduction.
(Notice that no one is talking about the new "Windows phone" either.
)(posted from an iPhone)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789381</id>
	<title>Re:What is the attraction to the iphone?</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1255882980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure.  It works well.  The options you need aren't hidden away in awkward to reach menus, the chat style texting interface was (at the time it came out) WAY better than most of the other stuff.  Etc.  I can download and watch iTunes U courses or various podcasts for my daily bus ride and SSH into the lab computer to see what it got done over night.  Easily.</p><p>For a smart phone it's not really that expensive.  The 3G is about the same price as most of the HTCs available from my provider and the  3GS is on par with the nicer Blackberries.</p><p>"Today's economy?"  Seriously?  I guess if you just lost your job or overextended yourself on a stupid mortgage maybe you shouldn't be looking at getting an iPhone.  It's definitely been worth the price for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure .
It works well .
The options you need are n't hidden away in awkward to reach menus , the chat style texting interface was ( at the time it came out ) WAY better than most of the other stuff .
Etc. I can download and watch iTunes U courses or various podcasts for my daily bus ride and SSH into the lab computer to see what it got done over night .
Easily.For a smart phone it 's not really that expensive .
The 3G is about the same price as most of the HTCs available from my provider and the 3GS is on par with the nicer Blackberries .
" Today 's economy ?
" Seriously ?
I guess if you just lost your job or overextended yourself on a stupid mortgage maybe you should n't be looking at getting an iPhone .
It 's definitely been worth the price for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure.
It works well.
The options you need aren't hidden away in awkward to reach menus, the chat style texting interface was (at the time it came out) WAY better than most of the other stuff.
Etc.  I can download and watch iTunes U courses or various podcasts for my daily bus ride and SSH into the lab computer to see what it got done over night.
Easily.For a smart phone it's not really that expensive.
The 3G is about the same price as most of the HTCs available from my provider and the  3GS is on par with the nicer Blackberries.
"Today's economy?
"  Seriously?
I guess if you just lost your job or overextended yourself on a stupid mortgage maybe you shouldn't be looking at getting an iPhone.
It's definitely been worth the price for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29806713</id>
	<title>Re:The "article" is actually an ad !!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256048220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First line of the summary:</p><p>"Verizon has just launched a new set of ads confirming the rumors of its upcoming iPhone competitor"</p><p>So... yeah.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First line of the summary : " Verizon has just launched a new set of ads confirming the rumors of its upcoming iPhone competitor " So... yeah .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First line of the summary:"Verizon has just launched a new set of ads confirming the rumors of its upcoming iPhone competitor"So... yeah.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784547</id>
	<title>Re:IPhone. Blah Blah Blah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255883880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder how Ted Stevens would explain a "shit network"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how Ted Stevens would explain a " shit network " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how Ted Stevens would explain a "shit network"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785441</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255892280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>All the US carriers do is cripple the phone hardware (disabling tethering, MMS, etc) and lock-in their customers.</p></div><p>With my G1, I can tether via Wi-Fi (works great btw), send and receive MMS, and my phone is unlocked (thanks T-Mobile).</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Glad I live in Europe where I'm free to choose the phone hardware and service independently, and the phones are not crippled.</p></div><p>You are more than welcome to get any GSM phone and slip your T-Mobile or At&amp;T SIM into it.  My G1 is the exact opposite of crippled.  Full root, able to be used an a wireless access point, I can roam in a space twice the size of Europe (i.e. the United States) and it doesn't cost me an extra dime.  I've never had a call drop and the data access works great too.  </p><p><div class="quote"><p>T-Mobile has been nothing but responsive to every question or concern I have had.  </p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All the US carriers do is cripple the phone hardware ( disabling tethering , MMS , etc ) and lock-in their customers.With my G1 , I can tether via Wi-Fi ( works great btw ) , send and receive MMS , and my phone is unlocked ( thanks T-Mobile ) .Glad I live in Europe where I 'm free to choose the phone hardware and service independently , and the phones are not crippled.You are more than welcome to get any GSM phone and slip your T-Mobile or At&amp;T SIM into it .
My G1 is the exact opposite of crippled .
Full root , able to be used an a wireless access point , I can roam in a space twice the size of Europe ( i.e .
the United States ) and it does n't cost me an extra dime .
I 've never had a call drop and the data access works great too .
T-Mobile has been nothing but responsive to every question or concern I have had .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the US carriers do is cripple the phone hardware (disabling tethering, MMS, etc) and lock-in their customers.With my G1, I can tether via Wi-Fi (works great btw), send and receive MMS, and my phone is unlocked (thanks T-Mobile).Glad I live in Europe where I'm free to choose the phone hardware and service independently, and the phones are not crippled.You are more than welcome to get any GSM phone and slip your T-Mobile or At&amp;T SIM into it.
My G1 is the exact opposite of crippled.
Full root, able to be used an a wireless access point, I can roam in a space twice the size of Europe (i.e.
the United States) and it doesn't cost me an extra dime.
I've never had a call drop and the data access works great too.
T-Mobile has been nothing but responsive to every question or concern I have had.  
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29804513</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Mr Z</author>
	<datestamp>1255979160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I seem to recall AT&amp;T had to be dragged <a href="http://opengardensblog.futuretext.com/archives/2007/01/the\_iphone\_is\_e.html" title="futuretext.com">kicking and screaming into Visual Voicemail support.</a> [futuretext.com]  That is, Jobs more or less forced it down Cingular^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HAT&amp;T's throat.  Forcing them to not subtract the value Apple already added does not constitute adding value.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I seem to recall AT&amp;T had to be dragged kicking and screaming into Visual Voicemail support .
[ futuretext.com ] That is , Jobs more or less forced it down Cingular ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ HAT&amp;T 's throat .
Forcing them to not subtract the value Apple already added does not constitute adding value .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seem to recall AT&amp;T had to be dragged kicking and screaming into Visual Voicemail support.
[futuretext.com]  That is, Jobs more or less forced it down Cingular^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HAT&amp;T's throat.
Forcing them to not subtract the value Apple already added does not constitute adding value.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786039</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784715</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Tokerat</author>
	<datestamp>1255885500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bought a Pre for the simple fact that it WASN'T on the Verizon or AT&amp;T network, and I'm constantly impressed with it (AT&amp;T has personally dicked me over on a large bill when they where Cingular, and Verizon has done the same to more than a few of my friends). It does seem a little unfortunate that an HTML/CSS/JavaScript based API prevents some really cool things that the iPhone does like 3D games, but I didn't buy a smartphone because I wanted a Nintendo DS, and the Pre is more than capable of handling all the tasks I need it to quite well, and the Sprint 3G network is great here in Boston.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought a Pre for the simple fact that it WAS N'T on the Verizon or AT&amp;T network , and I 'm constantly impressed with it ( AT&amp;T has personally dicked me over on a large bill when they where Cingular , and Verizon has done the same to more than a few of my friends ) .
It does seem a little unfortunate that an HTML/CSS/JavaScript based API prevents some really cool things that the iPhone does like 3D games , but I did n't buy a smartphone because I wanted a Nintendo DS , and the Pre is more than capable of handling all the tasks I need it to quite well , and the Sprint 3G network is great here in Boston .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought a Pre for the simple fact that it WASN'T on the Verizon or AT&amp;T network, and I'm constantly impressed with it (AT&amp;T has personally dicked me over on a large bill when they where Cingular, and Verizon has done the same to more than a few of my friends).
It does seem a little unfortunate that an HTML/CSS/JavaScript based API prevents some really cool things that the iPhone does like 3D games, but I didn't buy a smartphone because I wanted a Nintendo DS, and the Pre is more than capable of handling all the tasks I need it to quite well, and the Sprint 3G network is great here in Boston.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797227</id>
	<title>Re:Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>EvilBudMan</author>
	<datestamp>1255979460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We'll that's what Verizon claims is that their network is built out better than AT &amp; T. Really it's down to just them now in the US and they operate on different networks which is most of the problem. Now in Europe, you have the iPhone. Don't you have to choose a provider with the hardware there now as well for the iPhone?</p><p>I agree with choice though. I would like to buy the device and NOT be locked in. There is no reason for this other than greed, and well the carriers don't even make as much money that way. It's the thousands of years old battle between technology and the bean counters (content providers). They go by many names.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 'll that 's what Verizon claims is that their network is built out better than AT &amp; T. Really it 's down to just them now in the US and they operate on different networks which is most of the problem .
Now in Europe , you have the iPhone .
Do n't you have to choose a provider with the hardware there now as well for the iPhone ? I agree with choice though .
I would like to buy the device and NOT be locked in .
There is no reason for this other than greed , and well the carriers do n't even make as much money that way .
It 's the thousands of years old battle between technology and the bean counters ( content providers ) .
They go by many names .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We'll that's what Verizon claims is that their network is built out better than AT &amp; T. Really it's down to just them now in the US and they operate on different networks which is most of the problem.
Now in Europe, you have the iPhone.
Don't you have to choose a provider with the hardware there now as well for the iPhone?I agree with choice though.
I would like to buy the device and NOT be locked in.
There is no reason for this other than greed, and well the carriers don't even make as much money that way.
It's the thousands of years old battle between technology and the bean counters (content providers).
They go by many names.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783799</id>
	<title>Service and usability details</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255876800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about details that matter to me as a user, rather than how cool the technology is?</p><ul><li>How usable is the device as a phone?</li><li>How will voice service fare once data usage on Verizon's network spikes?</li><li>How much does voice service plus a data plan cost?</li><li>What are the caps for data usage?</li><li>Can I run VOIP applications?</li><li>Can I build and load my own applications on the phone?  (This is Verizon, famous for disabling phone functionality.)</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about details that matter to me as a user , rather than how cool the technology is ? How usable is the device as a phone ? How will voice service fare once data usage on Verizon 's network spikes ? How much does voice service plus a data plan cost ? What are the caps for data usage ? Can I run VOIP applications ? Can I build and load my own applications on the phone ?
( This is Verizon , famous for disabling phone functionality .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about details that matter to me as a user, rather than how cool the technology is?How usable is the device as a phone?How will voice service fare once data usage on Verizon's network spikes?How much does voice service plus a data plan cost?What are the caps for data usage?Can I run VOIP applications?Can I build and load my own applications on the phone?
(This is Verizon, famous for disabling phone functionality.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784331</id>
	<title>Typo in Summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255881720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here's what the summary was supposed to read (revisions in <b>bold</b>):<blockquote><div><p>...the Droid is the most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint. <b>However,</b> when you combine that with the Verizon network <b>and the Verizon 'so severely crippled as to render every feature worthless and cumbersome to use' software</b>, you've got something that is most definitely a <b>worthless piece of could-have-been-good-but-fucked-over-by-greed-and-lousy-QA SHIT like every other phone they make</b>.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
I am so sick of Verizon taking EVERYTHING good and finding ways to make to make it pointlessly crippled and useless.<br> <br>
Will this phone have tethering? Probably, but it's going to be disabled unless you pay $79.99 a month.<br>
Will this phone have contact and calendar syncing? Probably, but it's going to be disabled unless you pay $5.99 a month.<br>
Will this phone have music support? Definitely, but it's going to be severely crippled unless you pay $12.99 a month.<br>
<br>
Take your network and SHOVE IT.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's what the summary was supposed to read ( revisions in bold ) : ...the Droid is the most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint .
However , when you combine that with the Verizon network and the Verizon 'so severely crippled as to render every feature worthless and cumbersome to use ' software , you 've got something that is most definitely a worthless piece of could-have-been-good-but-fucked-over-by-greed-and-lousy-QA SHIT like every other phone they make .
I am so sick of Verizon taking EVERYTHING good and finding ways to make to make it pointlessly crippled and useless .
Will this phone have tethering ?
Probably , but it 's going to be disabled unless you pay $ 79.99 a month .
Will this phone have contact and calendar syncing ?
Probably , but it 's going to be disabled unless you pay $ 5.99 a month .
Will this phone have music support ?
Definitely , but it 's going to be severely crippled unless you pay $ 12.99 a month .
Take your network and SHOVE IT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's what the summary was supposed to read (revisions in bold):...the Droid is the most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint.
However, when you combine that with the Verizon network and the Verizon 'so severely crippled as to render every feature worthless and cumbersome to use' software, you've got something that is most definitely a worthless piece of could-have-been-good-but-fucked-over-by-greed-and-lousy-QA SHIT like every other phone they make.
I am so sick of Verizon taking EVERYTHING good and finding ways to make to make it pointlessly crippled and useless.
Will this phone have tethering?
Probably, but it's going to be disabled unless you pay $79.99 a month.
Will this phone have contact and calendar syncing?
Probably, but it's going to be disabled unless you pay $5.99 a month.
Will this phone have music support?
Definitely, but it's going to be severely crippled unless you pay $12.99 a month.
Take your network and SHOVE IT.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784059</id>
	<title>Not a threat... yet</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1255879440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's nothing to stop Apple from building a new iPhone using the newer, faster parts.  And iPhone has something that the android doesn't -- a lot of software apps that people love.  Moving from one iPhone to another is a no brainer for most.  Moving from their beloved and heavily spent/invested iPhone to something "better" requires a lot more consideration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's nothing to stop Apple from building a new iPhone using the newer , faster parts .
And iPhone has something that the android does n't -- a lot of software apps that people love .
Moving from one iPhone to another is a no brainer for most .
Moving from their beloved and heavily spent/invested iPhone to something " better " requires a lot more consideration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's nothing to stop Apple from building a new iPhone using the newer, faster parts.
And iPhone has something that the android doesn't -- a lot of software apps that people love.
Moving from one iPhone to another is a no brainer for most.
Moving from their beloved and heavily spent/invested iPhone to something "better" requires a lot more consideration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786447</id>
	<title>Re:IPhone. Blah Blah Blah</title>
	<author>konohitowa</author>
	<datestamp>1255856940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For years the IPhone didn't have: [blah blah blah]</p></div></blockquote><p>The iPhone was released on June 29, 2007. Exaggerate much?</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History\_of\_the\_iPhone" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History\_of\_the\_iPhone</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For years the IPhone did n't have : [ blah blah blah ] The iPhone was released on June 29 , 2007 .
Exaggerate much ? http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History \ _of \ _the \ _iPhone [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For years the IPhone didn't have: [blah blah blah]The iPhone was released on June 29, 2007.
Exaggerate much?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History\_of\_the\_iPhone [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786483</id>
	<title>Re:Show Me a Sign</title>
	<author>Mr2001</author>
	<datestamp>1255857180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've personally been hopeful for a good Android phone for a long time but so far it has failed to manifest.</p> </div><p>Can you expand on this? I'm not sure where you're looking, but I see three good Android phones on the US market right now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've personally been hopeful for a good Android phone for a long time but so far it has failed to manifest .
Can you expand on this ?
I 'm not sure where you 're looking , but I see three good Android phones on the US market right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've personally been hopeful for a good Android phone for a long time but so far it has failed to manifest.
Can you expand on this?
I'm not sure where you're looking, but I see three good Android phones on the US market right now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29787655</id>
	<title>Rachel?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255865700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no one's mentioning Rachel?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no one 's mentioning Rachel ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no one's mentioning Rachel?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784317</id>
	<title>Re:Just Don't Get It</title>
	<author>SetupWeasel</author>
	<datestamp>1255881540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Article aside. The Android platform has a real chance of dethroning the iPhone platform as well as the Blackberry platform for many of the same reasons that PCs beat our Macs. It is only a matter of time before a blockbuster Android phone comes out because any company can make one for any network. Then it will only be a matter of time before another one comes and another one and so on. Not one of these phones may have the popularity of the iPhone, but put together they may leave Apple in the dust. The tipping point will be when software developers shift resources from Apple aps to Android aps. If that happens, Android will start running away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Article aside .
The Android platform has a real chance of dethroning the iPhone platform as well as the Blackberry platform for many of the same reasons that PCs beat our Macs .
It is only a matter of time before a blockbuster Android phone comes out because any company can make one for any network .
Then it will only be a matter of time before another one comes and another one and so on .
Not one of these phones may have the popularity of the iPhone , but put together they may leave Apple in the dust .
The tipping point will be when software developers shift resources from Apple aps to Android aps .
If that happens , Android will start running away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Article aside.
The Android platform has a real chance of dethroning the iPhone platform as well as the Blackberry platform for many of the same reasons that PCs beat our Macs.
It is only a matter of time before a blockbuster Android phone comes out because any company can make one for any network.
Then it will only be a matter of time before another one comes and another one and so on.
Not one of these phones may have the popularity of the iPhone, but put together they may leave Apple in the dust.
The tipping point will be when software developers shift resources from Apple aps to Android aps.
If that happens, Android will start running away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703</id>
	<title>Advert for the verizon network?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255875840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The summary reads more like an advertisement for Verizon than anything else...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary reads more like an advertisement for Verizon than anything else.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary reads more like an advertisement for Verizon than anything else...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29792923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783791
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785987
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29791227
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797227
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784085
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784989
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29806713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784475
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783975
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784839
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29787341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785371
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29796073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784361
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786481
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789401
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786447
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784317
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29790989
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29803895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785241
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783929
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784041
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29804467
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784971
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29799195
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784113
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784041
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783929
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29792343
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789145
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784989
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29803747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29813387
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797055
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783929
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784509
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784317
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29795189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788569
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29803151
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786039
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29804513
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784913
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784483
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785509
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784073
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29844273
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788093
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786279
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29787375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784215
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29791415
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29793383
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29831925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784989
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797891
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1136223_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784041
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29793953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783809
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784317
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29795189
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29790989
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29803895
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783791
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784215
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784913
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788163
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29791227
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783765
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788093
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785029
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786861
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29803747
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784703
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29787375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786447
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29787341
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784113
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789145
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29844273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789427
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785175
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783759
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784107
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29803151
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784475
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788645
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783881
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783975
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784191
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783929
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29792343
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788833
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29806713
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785241
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784377
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788737
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784093
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29793953
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29804467
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788135
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783913
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784149
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784483
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784073
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786279
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784361
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785001
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783703
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783741
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785697
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29799195
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29831925
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789401
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785161
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784715
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784839
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784419
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784989
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797809
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29789107
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786683
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785371
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784531
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29788569
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784699
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29791415
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785025
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797055
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797891
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783781
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785441
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797615
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29792923
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786381
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785987
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29797227
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786039
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29804513
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783911
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29793383
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29813387
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29796073
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784059
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783869
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783859
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29785615
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29783811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29784971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786481
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786483
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1136223.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1136223.29786703
</commentlist>
</conversation>
