<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_20_1346204</id>
	<title>50+ Android Phones Expected In Near Future</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1256047260000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>wiseandroid writes <i>"It's not even a year ago that the HTC Dream G1 became the first Android enabled phone to be released publicly (on October 22nd, 2008) and now we have listed <a href="http://wiseandroid.com/NewsItem.aspx?category=News&amp;path=October&amp;itemid=14">more than 50 Android phones expected in the near future.</a>"</i> Of the 51 phones on this list, 12 (from nine manufacturers) are currently available.</htmltext>
<tokenext>wiseandroid writes " It 's not even a year ago that the HTC Dream G1 became the first Android enabled phone to be released publicly ( on October 22nd , 2008 ) and now we have listed more than 50 Android phones expected in the near future .
" Of the 51 phones on this list , 12 ( from nine manufacturers ) are currently available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wiseandroid writes "It's not even a year ago that the HTC Dream G1 became the first Android enabled phone to be released publicly (on October 22nd, 2008) and now we have listed more than 50 Android phones expected in the near future.
" Of the 51 phones on this list, 12 (from nine manufacturers) are currently available.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808697</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>Hadlock</author>
	<datestamp>1256055900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All this competition between phones, with a wide variety of them available, means Android OS 3.0 should kick some ass. Android is set to explode here come December/January, and the next (3rd?) generation of phones should be pretty rocking, with less slowdowns. I don't see this as a bad thing at all, and may force Apple to finally include some sort of real multitasking that doesn't hamper performance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All this competition between phones , with a wide variety of them available , means Android OS 3.0 should kick some ass .
Android is set to explode here come December/January , and the next ( 3rd ?
) generation of phones should be pretty rocking , with less slowdowns .
I do n't see this as a bad thing at all , and may force Apple to finally include some sort of real multitasking that does n't hamper performance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All this competition between phones, with a wide variety of them available, means Android OS 3.0 should kick some ass.
Android is set to explode here come December/January, and the next (3rd?
) generation of phones should be pretty rocking, with less slowdowns.
I don't see this as a bad thing at all, and may force Apple to finally include some sort of real multitasking that doesn't hamper performance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810387</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1256061240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A dozen phones would be healthy competition to appeal to a broad audience; 50+ phones is confusion that will drive consumers away.</p></div><p>You honestly expect someone to think, "I really want an Android phone, but there's just too many of them. I guess I'll get an iPhone instead." Anyone that knows enough to be looking specifically for an Android phone will not be confused by their choices.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A dozen phones would be healthy competition to appeal to a broad audience ; 50 + phones is confusion that will drive consumers away.You honestly expect someone to think , " I really want an Android phone , but there 's just too many of them .
I guess I 'll get an iPhone instead .
" Anyone that knows enough to be looking specifically for an Android phone will not be confused by their choices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A dozen phones would be healthy competition to appeal to a broad audience; 50+ phones is confusion that will drive consumers away.You honestly expect someone to think, "I really want an Android phone, but there's just too many of them.
I guess I'll get an iPhone instead.
" Anyone that knows enough to be looking specifically for an Android phone will not be confused by their choices.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811671</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1256065740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no reason, optics in a camera can't be good. There is just one lens in it anyway. Put the best one in that you can get, and you have good optics.</p><p>It's the tiny chips the put in there. Which makes sense, because it's only a phone. There simply is no space.</p><p>There is a great site out there, showing and proving, that 4.6 MP are the optimum for such (non-DSLR) devices. Unfortunately I can't remember the URL or find it on Google.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no reason , optics in a camera ca n't be good .
There is just one lens in it anyway .
Put the best one in that you can get , and you have good optics.It 's the tiny chips the put in there .
Which makes sense , because it 's only a phone .
There simply is no space.There is a great site out there , showing and proving , that 4.6 MP are the optimum for such ( non-DSLR ) devices .
Unfortunately I ca n't remember the URL or find it on Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no reason, optics in a camera can't be good.
There is just one lens in it anyway.
Put the best one in that you can get, and you have good optics.It's the tiny chips the put in there.
Which makes sense, because it's only a phone.
There simply is no space.There is a great site out there, showing and proving, that 4.6 MP are the optimum for such (non-DSLR) devices.
Unfortunately I can't remember the URL or find it on Google.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</id>
	<title>Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256051040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously.  Why do Android phones seem to ignore the camera?  I'd really like to see one with a very good camera, something like an Android version of the <a href="http://europe.nokia.com/find-products/devices/nokia-n86-8mp" title="nokia.com">N86</a> [nokia.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
Why do Android phones seem to ignore the camera ?
I 'd really like to see one with a very good camera , something like an Android version of the N86 [ nokia.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
Why do Android phones seem to ignore the camera?
I'd really like to see one with a very good camera, something like an Android version of the N86 [nokia.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807801</id>
	<title>just going to visit with friends at the yacht club</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256052600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1st, the 'friends' 'disappeared', then the yacht club closed. how annoying/inconvenient. what's next?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1st , the 'friends ' 'disappeared ' , then the yacht club closed .
how annoying/inconvenient .
what 's next ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1st, the 'friends' 'disappeared', then the yacht club closed.
how annoying/inconvenient.
what's next?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810033</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1256060160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I rather doubt it the android api is really extensive and becomes better every release.<br>The biggest problem J2ME made was to limit itself too much and to rely on third party extensions which added incompatible apis, so far android has avoided that mistake.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I rather doubt it the android api is really extensive and becomes better every release.The biggest problem J2ME made was to limit itself too much and to rely on third party extensions which added incompatible apis , so far android has avoided that mistake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I rather doubt it the android api is really extensive and becomes better every release.The biggest problem J2ME made was to limit itself too much and to rely on third party extensions which added incompatible apis, so far android has avoided that mistake.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808073</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>cabjf</author>
	<datestamp>1256053740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the only real rub comes with the apps.  For all those different models with different screen sizes and different input options, a developer will have more work just making sure his or her app works for the wide variety of phones.  And if it was the app store that really catapulted the iPhone to greatness, it's not an issue to take lightly while trying to expand the market.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the only real rub comes with the apps .
For all those different models with different screen sizes and different input options , a developer will have more work just making sure his or her app works for the wide variety of phones .
And if it was the app store that really catapulted the iPhone to greatness , it 's not an issue to take lightly while trying to expand the market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the only real rub comes with the apps.
For all those different models with different screen sizes and different input options, a developer will have more work just making sure his or her app works for the wide variety of phones.
And if it was the app store that really catapulted the iPhone to greatness, it's not an issue to take lightly while trying to expand the market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809489</id>
	<title>Too much variety?</title>
	<author>LoudMusic</author>
	<datestamp>1256058300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree that having options will help the Android market, but when you hit this many options I think you start to scare off a certain amount of the potential customers. One of the things Apple have going for them is the simplification of products. There are four iPod models, five if you count the phone, and they each serve noticeably different roles. Look at the laptops - there are four models, and very few configurable options per model. Compared to Dell who has effectively FIFTEEN starting points when shopping for a laptop for \_home\_, not to mention the 'business' store <a href="http://www.dell.com/home/laptops" title="dell.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.dell.com/home/laptops</a> [dell.com] . Then you have to configure the bugger!</p><p>I've helped friends and family pick out computers in the past and they ALL say that the Dell website is overwhelming and there are too many options. You could spend an hour just trying to figure out what type of laptop you want. If you go to the Apple website you pick cheap, expensive, or lightweight, then crank up the memory and enter your credit card number.</p><p>Personally I prefer the options, but I don't think that is the case with the general populous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree that having options will help the Android market , but when you hit this many options I think you start to scare off a certain amount of the potential customers .
One of the things Apple have going for them is the simplification of products .
There are four iPod models , five if you count the phone , and they each serve noticeably different roles .
Look at the laptops - there are four models , and very few configurable options per model .
Compared to Dell who has effectively FIFTEEN starting points when shopping for a laptop for \ _home \ _ , not to mention the 'business ' store http : //www.dell.com/home/laptops [ dell.com ] .
Then you have to configure the bugger ! I 've helped friends and family pick out computers in the past and they ALL say that the Dell website is overwhelming and there are too many options .
You could spend an hour just trying to figure out what type of laptop you want .
If you go to the Apple website you pick cheap , expensive , or lightweight , then crank up the memory and enter your credit card number.Personally I prefer the options , but I do n't think that is the case with the general populous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree that having options will help the Android market, but when you hit this many options I think you start to scare off a certain amount of the potential customers.
One of the things Apple have going for them is the simplification of products.
There are four iPod models, five if you count the phone, and they each serve noticeably different roles.
Look at the laptops - there are four models, and very few configurable options per model.
Compared to Dell who has effectively FIFTEEN starting points when shopping for a laptop for \_home\_, not to mention the 'business' store http://www.dell.com/home/laptops [dell.com] .
Then you have to configure the bugger!I've helped friends and family pick out computers in the past and they ALL say that the Dell website is overwhelming and there are too many options.
You could spend an hour just trying to figure out what type of laptop you want.
If you go to the Apple website you pick cheap, expensive, or lightweight, then crank up the memory and enter your credit card number.Personally I prefer the options, but I don't think that is the case with the general populous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808319</id>
	<title>Re:Nice, but need more info</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256054700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think AT&amp;T is so in bed with apple right now they aren't doing anything in the way of android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think AT&amp;T is so in bed with apple right now they are n't doing anything in the way of android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think AT&amp;T is so in bed with apple right now they aren't doing anything in the way of android.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807513</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810235</id>
	<title>Re:Features I want First.</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1256060700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>?<br>The os runs in a java-like virtual machine. If it has any relation to Java does this mean it will exhibit memory consumption similar to Java</p></div><p>The memory consumption you describe is mostly related to the desktop server jvm, it behaves following:<br>You have a memory window which is fixed and cannot be overruled by the program, the memory is consumed and no empty memory left alone, the garbage collector is triggered once the memory is filled up.<br>Even the mobile editions of java did not have the behavior they were optimized for saving ram.<br>Android goes even further, the VM is ram optimized but also has an altered package and class file format and does some prelinking and internal compile time optimization, to save more ram and to avoid the classloader speed bottleneck java generally has. So I assume the entire java thing is a non issue on android, entirely different beast, and so far it looks like the usage of java is a non issue.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>? The os runs in a java-like virtual machine .
If it has any relation to Java does this mean it will exhibit memory consumption similar to JavaThe memory consumption you describe is mostly related to the desktop server jvm , it behaves following : You have a memory window which is fixed and can not be overruled by the program , the memory is consumed and no empty memory left alone , the garbage collector is triggered once the memory is filled up.Even the mobile editions of java did not have the behavior they were optimized for saving ram.Android goes even further , the VM is ram optimized but also has an altered package and class file format and does some prelinking and internal compile time optimization , to save more ram and to avoid the classloader speed bottleneck java generally has .
So I assume the entire java thing is a non issue on android , entirely different beast , and so far it looks like the usage of java is a non issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>?The os runs in a java-like virtual machine.
If it has any relation to Java does this mean it will exhibit memory consumption similar to JavaThe memory consumption you describe is mostly related to the desktop server jvm, it behaves following:You have a memory window which is fixed and cannot be overruled by the program, the memory is consumed and no empty memory left alone, the garbage collector is triggered once the memory is filled up.Even the mobile editions of java did not have the behavior they were optimized for saving ram.Android goes even further, the VM is ram optimized but also has an altered package and class file format and does some prelinking and internal compile time optimization, to save more ram and to avoid the classloader speed bottleneck java generally has.
So I assume the entire java thing is a non issue on android, entirely different beast, and so far it looks like the usage of java is a non issue.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809719</id>
	<title>Re:Carriers</title>
	<author>chrb</author>
	<datestamp>1256059140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surely you could've bought a SIM-free Android phone? Personally, I'm curious to see if anyone in China starts selling the Shanzhai Tiger G3 direct to the West on ebay... for $140 it looks interesting. Mr Bunnie of Xbox hacking fame had favourable things to say recently about the <a href="http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=284" title="bunniestudios.com">Shanzhai</a> [bunniestudios.com] industry, it seems that is where the real cost cutting and innovation is coming from, kind of like the way Silicon Valley used to be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surely you could 've bought a SIM-free Android phone ?
Personally , I 'm curious to see if anyone in China starts selling the Shanzhai Tiger G3 direct to the West on ebay... for $ 140 it looks interesting .
Mr Bunnie of Xbox hacking fame had favourable things to say recently about the Shanzhai [ bunniestudios.com ] industry , it seems that is where the real cost cutting and innovation is coming from , kind of like the way Silicon Valley used to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surely you could've bought a SIM-free Android phone?
Personally, I'm curious to see if anyone in China starts selling the Shanzhai Tiger G3 direct to the West on ebay... for $140 it looks interesting.
Mr Bunnie of Xbox hacking fame had favourable things to say recently about the Shanzhai [bunniestudios.com] industry, it seems that is where the real cost cutting and innovation is coming from, kind of like the way Silicon Valley used to be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1256052060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean, I'm all for choice, but why so many? Why, in particular, are a few manufacturers in particular releasing so many models? <em>Half of the phones</em> (25 out of 51) come from just three companies--HTC (9), Motorola (9), and Samsung (7). I can see why a manufacturer would want some variety in general--slider, bar, flip; big with good battery life or small and thin and light--but aren't all Android phones big, touchscreen smartphones? I don't want to start googling every name (hasn't wiseandroid.com ever heard of <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/html40/struct/links.html" title="w3.org">links</a> [w3.org]?) so can anyone clue me in on the differences?</p><p>I like Apple's stuff and you might call me a "fanboi" but you have to admit they've made some good decisions in the past decade, especially with regard to simplifying their product lines. The stereotypical Slashdotter hates having their choices limited but everyone in sales, marketing, and product development should know about <a href="http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&amp;q=paradox+of+choice+video" title="google.com">the disadvantages to offering too many options.</a> [google.com] Make one phone with as many or as few features as you care to cram into it and the choice becomes a simple one--take it or leave it. Start offering them with minor differences--this one has WiFi but no GPS, this one has GPS but no WiFi, etc.--and people will start to say "screw it, what else is there?" Plus every time you offer more models you're increasing the cost of your R&amp;D but with less and less improvement in sales.</p><p>If anything, we should see more Android <em>devices</em>--Android technology without the phone, like the iPod touch. Clearly there's a market there, and you get around the whole pesky "tied to the carrier you hate" issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , I 'm all for choice , but why so many ?
Why , in particular , are a few manufacturers in particular releasing so many models ?
Half of the phones ( 25 out of 51 ) come from just three companies--HTC ( 9 ) , Motorola ( 9 ) , and Samsung ( 7 ) .
I can see why a manufacturer would want some variety in general--slider , bar , flip ; big with good battery life or small and thin and light--but are n't all Android phones big , touchscreen smartphones ?
I do n't want to start googling every name ( has n't wiseandroid.com ever heard of links [ w3.org ] ?
) so can anyone clue me in on the differences ? I like Apple 's stuff and you might call me a " fanboi " but you have to admit they 've made some good decisions in the past decade , especially with regard to simplifying their product lines .
The stereotypical Slashdotter hates having their choices limited but everyone in sales , marketing , and product development should know about the disadvantages to offering too many options .
[ google.com ] Make one phone with as many or as few features as you care to cram into it and the choice becomes a simple one--take it or leave it .
Start offering them with minor differences--this one has WiFi but no GPS , this one has GPS but no WiFi , etc.--and people will start to say " screw it , what else is there ?
" Plus every time you offer more models you 're increasing the cost of your R&amp;D but with less and less improvement in sales.If anything , we should see more Android devices--Android technology without the phone , like the iPod touch .
Clearly there 's a market there , and you get around the whole pesky " tied to the carrier you hate " issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, I'm all for choice, but why so many?
Why, in particular, are a few manufacturers in particular releasing so many models?
Half of the phones (25 out of 51) come from just three companies--HTC (9), Motorola (9), and Samsung (7).
I can see why a manufacturer would want some variety in general--slider, bar, flip; big with good battery life or small and thin and light--but aren't all Android phones big, touchscreen smartphones?
I don't want to start googling every name (hasn't wiseandroid.com ever heard of links [w3.org]?
) so can anyone clue me in on the differences?I like Apple's stuff and you might call me a "fanboi" but you have to admit they've made some good decisions in the past decade, especially with regard to simplifying their product lines.
The stereotypical Slashdotter hates having their choices limited but everyone in sales, marketing, and product development should know about the disadvantages to offering too many options.
[google.com] Make one phone with as many or as few features as you care to cram into it and the choice becomes a simple one--take it or leave it.
Start offering them with minor differences--this one has WiFi but no GPS, this one has GPS but no WiFi, etc.--and people will start to say "screw it, what else is there?
" Plus every time you offer more models you're increasing the cost of your R&amp;D but with less and less improvement in sales.If anything, we should see more Android devices--Android technology without the phone, like the iPod touch.
Clearly there's a market there, and you get around the whole pesky "tied to the carrier you hate" issue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809655</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>FrigBot</author>
	<datestamp>1256058840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think most people buying these phones (or any phone, except maybe the IPhone) don't care what operating system they are using. Most mortals care about the coolness of the phone itself and its ease-of-use-ness. If it happens that the phone runs Android, well, ok.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think most people buying these phones ( or any phone , except maybe the IPhone ) do n't care what operating system they are using .
Most mortals care about the coolness of the phone itself and its ease-of-use-ness .
If it happens that the phone runs Android , well , ok .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think most people buying these phones (or any phone, except maybe the IPhone) don't care what operating system they are using.
Most mortals care about the coolness of the phone itself and its ease-of-use-ness.
If it happens that the phone runs Android, well, ok.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810665</id>
	<title>The downside of that</title>
	<author>itsdapead</author>
	<datestamp>1256062200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is one of the biggest ways that Android and the iPhone differ. With the iPhone, you have one phone, and one OS.</p></div><p>There's a flipside to that, though, especially when it comes to the App market.
</p><p>One of the iPhone's huge hidden advantages is that there is that there is only one UI to design for: every App has to work well with just a touchscreen and accelerometer if it is to succeed.
</p><p>With a diversity of Android handsets appearing, how many developers will actually test their wares on every handset? Already, I've encountered some apps written for the G1 that don't work properly with the Hero's soft keyboard (e.g. most of the terminal emulators). Some games are unplayable because the "chin" buttons have been re-arranged. So far, most authors seem eager to address this, but when these problems are multiplied by 50, will they keep up?
</p><p>Its not just physical differences: HTC have tinkered with the GUI quite a bit so (e.g.) alternative music players work fine, but don't integrate with the lock screen. Again - seems trivial, but multiply that by 50.
</p><p>Operating systems for "full size" PCs don't have such a big issue: most variations will include a physical keyboard, a mouse and a decent-sized screen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one of the biggest ways that Android and the iPhone differ .
With the iPhone , you have one phone , and one OS.There 's a flipside to that , though , especially when it comes to the App market .
One of the iPhone 's huge hidden advantages is that there is that there is only one UI to design for : every App has to work well with just a touchscreen and accelerometer if it is to succeed .
With a diversity of Android handsets appearing , how many developers will actually test their wares on every handset ?
Already , I 've encountered some apps written for the G1 that do n't work properly with the Hero 's soft keyboard ( e.g .
most of the terminal emulators ) .
Some games are unplayable because the " chin " buttons have been re-arranged .
So far , most authors seem eager to address this , but when these problems are multiplied by 50 , will they keep up ?
Its not just physical differences : HTC have tinkered with the GUI quite a bit so ( e.g .
) alternative music players work fine , but do n't integrate with the lock screen .
Again - seems trivial , but multiply that by 50 .
Operating systems for " full size " PCs do n't have such a big issue : most variations will include a physical keyboard , a mouse and a decent-sized screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one of the biggest ways that Android and the iPhone differ.
With the iPhone, you have one phone, and one OS.There's a flipside to that, though, especially when it comes to the App market.
One of the iPhone's huge hidden advantages is that there is that there is only one UI to design for: every App has to work well with just a touchscreen and accelerometer if it is to succeed.
With a diversity of Android handsets appearing, how many developers will actually test their wares on every handset?
Already, I've encountered some apps written for the G1 that don't work properly with the Hero's soft keyboard (e.g.
most of the terminal emulators).
Some games are unplayable because the "chin" buttons have been re-arranged.
So far, most authors seem eager to address this, but when these problems are multiplied by 50, will they keep up?
Its not just physical differences: HTC have tinkered with the GUI quite a bit so (e.g.
) alternative music players work fine, but don't integrate with the lock screen.
Again - seems trivial, but multiply that by 50.
Operating systems for "full size" PCs don't have such a big issue: most variations will include a physical keyboard, a mouse and a decent-sized screen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809085</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>poetmatt</author>
	<datestamp>1256057160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>do you really expect any cellphone to have a very good camera? N86 even has a <a href="http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/news/item/9305\_Quantifying\_the\_improvements\_i.php" title="allaboutsymbian.com">shitty camera.</a> [allaboutsymbian.com] This was the first google result for N86 camera.</p><p>N86 is not a good camera, it just adds some megapixels.  More megapixels doesn't mean a better camera, it just means a bigger picture.  Most android phones are 3-7 megapixels.</p><p>Better software, better telephoto capability, these things will add some better quality. Meanwhile, the flash will still be limited, and the fact that you can't have a telescopic zoom like a normal camera (barring a couple phones), means that basically, your phone's pictures are not likely to compare to even an inexpensive camera's photos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>do you really expect any cellphone to have a very good camera ?
N86 even has a shitty camera .
[ allaboutsymbian.com ] This was the first google result for N86 camera.N86 is not a good camera , it just adds some megapixels .
More megapixels does n't mean a better camera , it just means a bigger picture .
Most android phones are 3-7 megapixels.Better software , better telephoto capability , these things will add some better quality .
Meanwhile , the flash will still be limited , and the fact that you ca n't have a telescopic zoom like a normal camera ( barring a couple phones ) , means that basically , your phone 's pictures are not likely to compare to even an inexpensive camera 's photos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>do you really expect any cellphone to have a very good camera?
N86 even has a shitty camera.
[allaboutsymbian.com] This was the first google result for N86 camera.N86 is not a good camera, it just adds some megapixels.
More megapixels doesn't mean a better camera, it just means a bigger picture.
Most android phones are 3-7 megapixels.Better software, better telephoto capability, these things will add some better quality.
Meanwhile, the flash will still be limited, and the fact that you can't have a telescopic zoom like a normal camera (barring a couple phones), means that basically, your phone's pictures are not likely to compare to even an inexpensive camera's photos.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29824249</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>islisis</author>
	<datestamp>1256144040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about a 3x optical zoom lens?</p><p><a href="http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/07/18/review-casio-exilim-51mp-camera-phone/" title="crunchgear.com" rel="nofollow">Verizon Casio Exilim</a> [crunchgear.com]</p><p>Or move to Japan? A camera with a WVGA OLED<br><a href="http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/en/news-19130-AU+KDDI+Winter+Line-up\%E2\%80\%A6+Exilim+Ketai+CA003+and+CA004.html" title="akihabaranews.com" rel="nofollow">KDDI Casio Exilim CA004</a> [akihabaranews.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about a 3x optical zoom lens ? Verizon Casio Exilim [ crunchgear.com ] Or move to Japan ?
A camera with a WVGA OLEDKDDI Casio Exilim CA004 [ akihabaranews.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about a 3x optical zoom lens?Verizon Casio Exilim [crunchgear.com]Or move to Japan?
A camera with a WVGA OLEDKDDI Casio Exilim CA004 [akihabaranews.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820707</id>
	<title>Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>jareth-0205</author>
	<datestamp>1256119080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, the CPU in the current crop of Android phones isn't that impressive. It looks like the next generation coming out this year should have the more modern ARM Cortex which is the same CPU behind the iPhone 3GS and the Palm Pre.</p><p><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/14/core-values-the-silicon-behind-android/" title="engadget.com">http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/14/core-values-the-silicon-behind-android/</a> [engadget.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , the CPU in the current crop of Android phones is n't that impressive .
It looks like the next generation coming out this year should have the more modern ARM Cortex which is the same CPU behind the iPhone 3GS and the Palm Pre.http : //www.engadget.com/2009/10/14/core-values-the-silicon-behind-android/ [ engadget.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, the CPU in the current crop of Android phones isn't that impressive.
It looks like the next generation coming out this year should have the more modern ARM Cortex which is the same CPU behind the iPhone 3GS and the Palm Pre.http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/14/core-values-the-silicon-behind-android/ [engadget.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709</id>
	<title>Carriers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256052240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wired had a great article on this a year ago or so. Every carrier was afraid of touching Android. They said if they used a common OS between phones, they were afraid they would become dumb carriers, and it would remove the potential to advertise each network provider having unique phones.</p><p>In reality, today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS, Web OS, the iPhone OS, and Windows Mobile on their phones. They can't customize the OS. So buying a Blackberry on Verizon is no different from buying a Blackberry on AT&amp;T. Google offers up Android for free, and tells networks that they can even customize the software so AT&amp;T's build of Android is unique, and they reject Android. It makes zero sense.</p><p>I desperately wanted and Android phone. I contacted customer support for several providers telling them they could have my business if they put out an Android phone. (T-Mobile basically has no coverage in Omaha, so they weren't an option). I waited an year. No Android phones came out.</p><p>So instead, I bought an iPhone. I'm not terribly happy that I have an iPhone as opposed to an Android phone. I'm not terribly happy I ended up with AT&amp;T. But honestly, it seems like providers really didn't want my business. For all their supposed desire to find an iPhone-killer, they're ignoring the FREE iPhone-killer right infront of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wired had a great article on this a year ago or so .
Every carrier was afraid of touching Android .
They said if they used a common OS between phones , they were afraid they would become dumb carriers , and it would remove the potential to advertise each network provider having unique phones.In reality , today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS , Web OS , the iPhone OS , and Windows Mobile on their phones .
They ca n't customize the OS .
So buying a Blackberry on Verizon is no different from buying a Blackberry on AT&amp;T .
Google offers up Android for free , and tells networks that they can even customize the software so AT&amp;T 's build of Android is unique , and they reject Android .
It makes zero sense.I desperately wanted and Android phone .
I contacted customer support for several providers telling them they could have my business if they put out an Android phone .
( T-Mobile basically has no coverage in Omaha , so they were n't an option ) .
I waited an year .
No Android phones came out.So instead , I bought an iPhone .
I 'm not terribly happy that I have an iPhone as opposed to an Android phone .
I 'm not terribly happy I ended up with AT&amp;T .
But honestly , it seems like providers really did n't want my business .
For all their supposed desire to find an iPhone-killer , they 're ignoring the FREE iPhone-killer right infront of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wired had a great article on this a year ago or so.
Every carrier was afraid of touching Android.
They said if they used a common OS between phones, they were afraid they would become dumb carriers, and it would remove the potential to advertise each network provider having unique phones.In reality, today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS, Web OS, the iPhone OS, and Windows Mobile on their phones.
They can't customize the OS.
So buying a Blackberry on Verizon is no different from buying a Blackberry on AT&amp;T.
Google offers up Android for free, and tells networks that they can even customize the software so AT&amp;T's build of Android is unique, and they reject Android.
It makes zero sense.I desperately wanted and Android phone.
I contacted customer support for several providers telling them they could have my business if they put out an Android phone.
(T-Mobile basically has no coverage in Omaha, so they weren't an option).
I waited an year.
No Android phones came out.So instead, I bought an iPhone.
I'm not terribly happy that I have an iPhone as opposed to an Android phone.
I'm not terribly happy I ended up with AT&amp;T.
But honestly, it seems like providers really didn't want my business.
For all their supposed desire to find an iPhone-killer, they're ignoring the FREE iPhone-killer right infront of them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809095</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>LordVader717</author>
	<datestamp>1256057160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what? The best selling PC model is surely a Mac, and probably was ever since the likes the commodore. Did that save them from near-extinction, neglect and abandonment in the 90s?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what ?
The best selling PC model is surely a Mac , and probably was ever since the likes the commodore .
Did that save them from near-extinction , neglect and abandonment in the 90s ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what?
The best selling PC model is surely a Mac, and probably was ever since the likes the commodore.
Did that save them from near-extinction, neglect and abandonment in the 90s?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810077</id>
	<title>Re:Droid ad didn't make complete sense</title>
	<author>genghisjahn</author>
	<datestamp>1256060280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Remember AT&amp;T's M-Life campaign of the late 90s?  So many bill boards with "What is M-Life?  Is it fattening?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember AT&amp;T 's M-Life campaign of the late 90s ?
So many bill boards with " What is M-Life ?
Is it fattening ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember AT&amp;T's M-Life campaign of the late 90s?
So many bill boards with "What is M-Life?
Is it fattening?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809689</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256058960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is one of the biggest ways that Windows Mobile and the iPhone differ. With the iPhone, you have one phone, and one OS. With Windows Mobile, you have one OS but many different phones. While the iPhone already has a huge number of apps available for their one device, not everyone wants a big touchscreen for a phone. Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Windows Mobile to compete. Smartphones are still only used by a small percentage all mobile phone users--it's still a growing market. It seems that Microsoft is using this opportunity to make smart phones more accessible and more affordable. I think this is a far more sustainable strategy than Apple's one phone philosophy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one of the biggest ways that Windows Mobile and the iPhone differ .
With the iPhone , you have one phone , and one OS .
With Windows Mobile , you have one OS but many different phones .
While the iPhone already has a huge number of apps available for their one device , not everyone wants a big touchscreen for a phone .
Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Windows Mobile to compete .
Smartphones are still only used by a small percentage all mobile phone users--it 's still a growing market .
It seems that Microsoft is using this opportunity to make smart phones more accessible and more affordable .
I think this is a far more sustainable strategy than Apple 's one phone philosophy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one of the biggest ways that Windows Mobile and the iPhone differ.
With the iPhone, you have one phone, and one OS.
With Windows Mobile, you have one OS but many different phones.
While the iPhone already has a huge number of apps available for their one device, not everyone wants a big touchscreen for a phone.
Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Windows Mobile to compete.
Smartphones are still only used by a small percentage all mobile phone users--it's still a growing market.
It seems that Microsoft is using this opportunity to make smart phones more accessible and more affordable.
I think this is a far more sustainable strategy than Apple's one phone philosophy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808217</id>
	<title>Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>SCHecklerX</author>
	<datestamp>1256054280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just got a palm pre myself.  While being on sprint sucks, the phone is amazing.  Very open with an active homebrew community.  Easy to 'root' (even from linux<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I don't even own a windows computer).  Changing the phone's behavior is usually just a matter of editing some javascript and CSS (most of the things you'd like to do there is already a patch for, and you don't need to fully install optware just to install the patches).  This is all done in a familiar linux environment.</p><p>I was on the fence about getting a 'droid on verizon and the palm pre.  After a few days with the pre, however, I am VERY HAPPY with my decision.  WebOS is the most open thing I've ever seen on a phone.  Messaging is still a little better on the blackberry, but WebOS does it as well as any other platform.  And palm / sprint seem to be quite ok with it (other than tethering.  *sigh*).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just got a palm pre myself .
While being on sprint sucks , the phone is amazing .
Very open with an active homebrew community .
Easy to 'root ' ( even from linux ... I do n't even own a windows computer ) .
Changing the phone 's behavior is usually just a matter of editing some javascript and CSS ( most of the things you 'd like to do there is already a patch for , and you do n't need to fully install optware just to install the patches ) .
This is all done in a familiar linux environment.I was on the fence about getting a 'droid on verizon and the palm pre .
After a few days with the pre , however , I am VERY HAPPY with my decision .
WebOS is the most open thing I 've ever seen on a phone .
Messaging is still a little better on the blackberry , but WebOS does it as well as any other platform .
And palm / sprint seem to be quite ok with it ( other than tethering .
* sigh * ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just got a palm pre myself.
While being on sprint sucks, the phone is amazing.
Very open with an active homebrew community.
Easy to 'root' (even from linux ... I don't even own a windows computer).
Changing the phone's behavior is usually just a matter of editing some javascript and CSS (most of the things you'd like to do there is already a patch for, and you don't need to fully install optware just to install the patches).
This is all done in a familiar linux environment.I was on the fence about getting a 'droid on verizon and the palm pre.
After a few days with the pre, however, I am VERY HAPPY with my decision.
WebOS is the most open thing I've ever seen on a phone.
Messaging is still a little better on the blackberry, but WebOS does it as well as any other platform.
And palm / sprint seem to be quite ok with it (other than tethering.
*sigh*).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818255</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256051760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I fully expect to see an Android phone take #1 in the future. Why? Because once these 50+ phones are out, and the 100's that follow, there will be far more users of Android phones than phones running the Mac or RIM OS.</i>
<p>
So basically you're arguing that what the iPhone did to Symbian won't happen again, because shut up is why.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fully expect to see an Android phone take # 1 in the future .
Why ? Because once these 50 + phones are out , and the 100 's that follow , there will be far more users of Android phones than phones running the Mac or RIM OS .
So basically you 're arguing that what the iPhone did to Symbian wo n't happen again , because shut up is why .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fully expect to see an Android phone take #1 in the future.
Why? Because once these 50+ phones are out, and the 100's that follow, there will be far more users of Android phones than phones running the Mac or RIM OS.
So basically you're arguing that what the iPhone did to Symbian won't happen again, because shut up is why.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29817279</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256046000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're on a GSM netwrork, just buy an el-cheapo phone and swap the SIM card when you need to enter such areas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're on a GSM netwrork , just buy an el-cheapo phone and swap the SIM card when you need to enter such areas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're on a GSM netwrork, just buy an el-cheapo phone and swap the SIM card when you need to enter such areas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809369</id>
	<title>App Compatibility</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256057940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right now there is one rule for Android software:</p><p>* Every app works on every handset.</p><p>That's it. That's the whole thing. All Android devices have AGPS with a compass, and an HVGA display. On-screen or hardware keyboard input is passed to apps the same way, so it doesn't matter which a device has. Likewise, access points are passed to apps according to the SDK, so it doesn't matter what kind of network access the device actually uses. GPS and AGPS with a compass is mandatory, so any app which runs on an Android handset can expect those features.</p><p>With 1.6, they'll diversify by adding an option in the SDK for two different screen sizes, one smaller and one larger than existing HVGA devices. The store automatically filters according to what resolution the device supports: higher resolution devices can run lower-resolution apps in compatability mode, but not vice versa. With the new devices, the new rule is:</p><p>* If you don't have a QVGA device, then every app works.<br>* If you have a QVGA device, then you can run any app you see on the store.</p><p>Now, you tell me how that's "worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right now there is one rule for Android software : * Every app works on every handset.That 's it .
That 's the whole thing .
All Android devices have AGPS with a compass , and an HVGA display .
On-screen or hardware keyboard input is passed to apps the same way , so it does n't matter which a device has .
Likewise , access points are passed to apps according to the SDK , so it does n't matter what kind of network access the device actually uses .
GPS and AGPS with a compass is mandatory , so any app which runs on an Android handset can expect those features.With 1.6 , they 'll diversify by adding an option in the SDK for two different screen sizes , one smaller and one larger than existing HVGA devices .
The store automatically filters according to what resolution the device supports : higher resolution devices can run lower-resolution apps in compatability mode , but not vice versa .
With the new devices , the new rule is : * If you do n't have a QVGA device , then every app works .
* If you have a QVGA device , then you can run any app you see on the store.Now , you tell me how that 's " worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right now there is one rule for Android software:* Every app works on every handset.That's it.
That's the whole thing.
All Android devices have AGPS with a compass, and an HVGA display.
On-screen or hardware keyboard input is passed to apps the same way, so it doesn't matter which a device has.
Likewise, access points are passed to apps according to the SDK, so it doesn't matter what kind of network access the device actually uses.
GPS and AGPS with a compass is mandatory, so any app which runs on an Android handset can expect those features.With 1.6, they'll diversify by adding an option in the SDK for two different screen sizes, one smaller and one larger than existing HVGA devices.
The store automatically filters according to what resolution the device supports: higher resolution devices can run lower-resolution apps in compatability mode, but not vice versa.
With the new devices, the new rule is:* If you don't have a QVGA device, then every app works.
* If you have a QVGA device, then you can run any app you see on the store.Now, you tell me how that's "worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807369</id>
	<title>too late</title>
	<author>Adolf Hitroll</author>
	<datestamp>1256050920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they've lost: people want either an iPhone or your Ma's waterproof 2$ Nokia rugged phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they 've lost : people want either an iPhone or your Ma 's waterproof 2 $ Nokia rugged phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they've lost: people want either an iPhone or your Ma's waterproof 2$ Nokia rugged phone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29821335</id>
	<title>The DalvikVM is the problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256126940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Google would finally catch up to the speed of Suns VM and a working garbage collection (i.e. not freezing the whole app every few seconds), then I start to believe that Android could dominate the mobile market in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Google would finally catch up to the speed of Suns VM and a working garbage collection ( i.e .
not freezing the whole app every few seconds ) , then I start to believe that Android could dominate the mobile market in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Google would finally catch up to the speed of Suns VM and a working garbage collection (i.e.
not freezing the whole app every few seconds), then I start to believe that Android could dominate the mobile market in the future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811475</id>
	<title>Re:Nice, but need more info</title>
	<author>42sd</author>
	<datestamp>1256065080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>AT&amp;T was supposed to release one(HTC Lancaster) at the end of July, but backed out with little fanfare.  I dealt with a Blackberry with a non-working 0 for a month in order to get that one with my upgrade.... only to end up with another blackberry.
<br>
<br>
I wouldn't count on anything from AT&amp;T until you can see it in the store.</htmltext>
<tokenext>AT&amp;T was supposed to release one ( HTC Lancaster ) at the end of July , but backed out with little fanfare .
I dealt with a Blackberry with a non-working 0 for a month in order to get that one with my upgrade.... only to end up with another blackberry .
I would n't count on anything from AT&amp;T until you can see it in the store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AT&amp;T was supposed to release one(HTC Lancaster) at the end of July, but backed out with little fanfare.
I dealt with a Blackberry with a non-working 0 for a month in order to get that one with my upgrade.... only to end up with another blackberry.
I wouldn't count on anything from AT&amp;T until you can see it in the store.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807513</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808757</id>
	<title>Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256056080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>start a discussion by contributing value to it, not by imperially telling others to discuss.<br> <br>Penis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>start a discussion by contributing value to it , not by imperially telling others to discuss .
Penis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>start a discussion by contributing value to it, not by imperially telling others to discuss.
Penis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807863</id>
	<title>51 is hardly impressive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256052840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>next to the 2 million iPhones out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>next to the 2 million iPhones out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>next to the 2 million iPhones out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807771</id>
	<title>Re:Diversity of features</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1256052480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are supposedly 50 Android phones in the works. I'm sure some will have keyboards. The Motorola Calgary has a keyboard for instance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are supposedly 50 Android phones in the works .
I 'm sure some will have keyboards .
The Motorola Calgary has a keyboard for instance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are supposedly 50 Android phones in the works.
I'm sure some will have keyboards.
The Motorola Calgary has a keyboard for instance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807481</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>dingen</author>
	<datestamp>1256053620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is no such thing as a decent camera on a phone. Seriously, I'm not trolling. It doesn't matter if it offers more megapixels, auto white balance or a Zeiss lens. Compared to any decent camera out there, pictures from a phone will always look like crap. I rather have fewer megapixels, so at least the crap consumes less disk space.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no such thing as a decent camera on a phone .
Seriously , I 'm not trolling .
It does n't matter if it offers more megapixels , auto white balance or a Zeiss lens .
Compared to any decent camera out there , pictures from a phone will always look like crap .
I rather have fewer megapixels , so at least the crap consumes less disk space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no such thing as a decent camera on a phone.
Seriously, I'm not trolling.
It doesn't matter if it offers more megapixels, auto white balance or a Zeiss lens.
Compared to any decent camera out there, pictures from a phone will always look like crap.
I rather have fewer megapixels, so at least the crap consumes less disk space.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807701</id>
	<title>I wonder if this will help the app ecosystem</title>
	<author>dingen</author>
	<datestamp>1256052240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The main thing the iPhone's got going for it in my view is the enormous amount of application available for the platform. Android has the same potential with a nice centralized distribution channel, while allowing more open development. It would seem to make sense that this will result in many more Android apps in the future, but I wonder if the huge amount of different phones will be of any help at this or maybe in fact create a barrier for developers.</p><p>It seems to me that one of the reasons there aren't as many apps out there for Symbian or WinMo is the fact that the hardware which runs these operating systems is so incredibly diverse that it's almost impossible to create an app which runs on everything. Some phones offer multitouch, other's don't. Some phones offer an accelerometer, other's don't. The same goes for pretty much every feature... recording video, a second camera, GPS, you name it. Not to mention the different screen sizes and different UI widgets. These differences make it more difficult for a developer to create an app for these platforms, resulting in fewer apps on these platforms.</p><p>Now I know Android doesn't suffer from all of these difficulties... but still I think 50 different phones make it harder to create an app for Android than for the iPhone, where basically only 1 model exists (although in 3 versions).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The main thing the iPhone 's got going for it in my view is the enormous amount of application available for the platform .
Android has the same potential with a nice centralized distribution channel , while allowing more open development .
It would seem to make sense that this will result in many more Android apps in the future , but I wonder if the huge amount of different phones will be of any help at this or maybe in fact create a barrier for developers.It seems to me that one of the reasons there are n't as many apps out there for Symbian or WinMo is the fact that the hardware which runs these operating systems is so incredibly diverse that it 's almost impossible to create an app which runs on everything .
Some phones offer multitouch , other 's do n't .
Some phones offer an accelerometer , other 's do n't .
The same goes for pretty much every feature... recording video , a second camera , GPS , you name it .
Not to mention the different screen sizes and different UI widgets .
These differences make it more difficult for a developer to create an app for these platforms , resulting in fewer apps on these platforms.Now I know Android does n't suffer from all of these difficulties... but still I think 50 different phones make it harder to create an app for Android than for the iPhone , where basically only 1 model exists ( although in 3 versions ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main thing the iPhone's got going for it in my view is the enormous amount of application available for the platform.
Android has the same potential with a nice centralized distribution channel, while allowing more open development.
It would seem to make sense that this will result in many more Android apps in the future, but I wonder if the huge amount of different phones will be of any help at this or maybe in fact create a barrier for developers.It seems to me that one of the reasons there aren't as many apps out there for Symbian or WinMo is the fact that the hardware which runs these operating systems is so incredibly diverse that it's almost impossible to create an app which runs on everything.
Some phones offer multitouch, other's don't.
Some phones offer an accelerometer, other's don't.
The same goes for pretty much every feature... recording video, a second camera, GPS, you name it.
Not to mention the different screen sizes and different UI widgets.
These differences make it more difficult for a developer to create an app for these platforms, resulting in fewer apps on these platforms.Now I know Android doesn't suffer from all of these difficulties... but still I think 50 different phones make it harder to create an app for Android than for the iPhone, where basically only 1 model exists (although in 3 versions).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807523</id>
	<title>Just phones?</title>
	<author>phonewebcam</author>
	<datestamp>1256051580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meh. Our Japanese friends have moved onto <a href="http://analytica1st.com/analytica1st/2009/04/japanese-propose-fridge-running-on.html" title="analytica1st.com" rel="nofollow">fridges</a> [analytica1st.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meh .
Our Japanese friends have moved onto fridges [ analytica1st.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meh.
Our Japanese friends have moved onto fridges [analytica1st.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807601</id>
	<title>Momentum</title>
	<author>hattig</author>
	<datestamp>1256051880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems the momentum is with Android for "OEM handsets", the handsets that would previously have used Windows Mobile have migrated en-mass to a cheaper, more modern, sellable phone OS.</p><p>It just convinces me that Windows Mobile 6.5 is too little, too late, and it doesn't offer much anyway. Windows Mobile 7 - presumably their next-generation mobile OS - is horribly delayed and will be feature-poor (generation 1) in comparison to Android, WebOS and iPhone OS. Maemo is on the sidelines too, for Nokia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems the momentum is with Android for " OEM handsets " , the handsets that would previously have used Windows Mobile have migrated en-mass to a cheaper , more modern , sellable phone OS.It just convinces me that Windows Mobile 6.5 is too little , too late , and it does n't offer much anyway .
Windows Mobile 7 - presumably their next-generation mobile OS - is horribly delayed and will be feature-poor ( generation 1 ) in comparison to Android , WebOS and iPhone OS .
Maemo is on the sidelines too , for Nokia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems the momentum is with Android for "OEM handsets", the handsets that would previously have used Windows Mobile have migrated en-mass to a cheaper, more modern, sellable phone OS.It just convinces me that Windows Mobile 6.5 is too little, too late, and it doesn't offer much anyway.
Windows Mobile 7 - presumably their next-generation mobile OS - is horribly delayed and will be feature-poor (generation 1) in comparison to Android, WebOS and iPhone OS.
Maemo is on the sidelines too, for Nokia.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818083</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1256050800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Right now there are 100's of phones on the market, all running some sort of OS. Each of them appeal to different audiences, with different features, reliability, and carrier compatability.</p></div><p>And look at how well that's working for them, with profits of most mobile phone makers dropping through the floor.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right now there are 100 's of phones on the market , all running some sort of OS .
Each of them appeal to different audiences , with different features , reliability , and carrier compatability.And look at how well that 's working for them , with profits of most mobile phone makers dropping through the floor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right now there are 100's of phones on the market, all running some sort of OS.
Each of them appeal to different audiences, with different features, reliability, and carrier compatability.And look at how well that's working for them, with profits of most mobile phone makers dropping through the floor.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810623</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256062020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ahhh..the un-indoctrinated.<br>Security rules are rules.  Created in large part for the security of the jobs of those who create/enforce the rules, as near as I can tell.<br>But just the same, learn the rules, follow the rules, don't think.  You'll be fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ahhh..the un-indoctrinated.Security rules are rules .
Created in large part for the security of the jobs of those who create/enforce the rules , as near as I can tell.But just the same , learn the rules , follow the rules , do n't think .
You 'll be fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ahhh..the un-indoctrinated.Security rules are rules.
Created in large part for the security of the jobs of those who create/enforce the rules, as near as I can tell.But just the same, learn the rules, follow the rules, don't think.
You'll be fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809325</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808131</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>jhfry</author>
	<datestamp>1256053920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't understand what is happening at all.</p><p>Right now there are 100's of phones on the market, all running some sort of OS.  Each of them appeal to different audiences, with different features, reliability, and carrier compatability.</p><p>Essentially, some of those 100's of current models are being replaced with models running Android.  Android is an operating system, it does not define the device it runs upon.  Just like I can run Linux using just a tty interface over a serial link, or I can run it with a 3d desktop across multiple screens; Android can be similarly used for different phones.</p><p>The advantages of Android over existing phone OS's are threefold:<br>1. cost... there is no cost to the manufacturer of the phone or the carrier.<br>2. compatibility... applications for Android will be compatable with other manufacturers Android handsets, so different manufacturers will compete on quality of their product rather than the amount of software available.<br>3. features... Android was developed to be very feature rich, of course manufacturers can disable features but if they want them it is trivial to enable them.  If the public begins to demand additional features as ideas change, then Android can be upgraded to include those features.</p><p>Essentially, there were no phone OS's that manufacturers could even purchase that would result in a product so refined that it could compete with Apple and Blackberry, and neither of them were licensing their code.  Android changes that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't understand what is happening at all.Right now there are 100 's of phones on the market , all running some sort of OS .
Each of them appeal to different audiences , with different features , reliability , and carrier compatability.Essentially , some of those 100 's of current models are being replaced with models running Android .
Android is an operating system , it does not define the device it runs upon .
Just like I can run Linux using just a tty interface over a serial link , or I can run it with a 3d desktop across multiple screens ; Android can be similarly used for different phones.The advantages of Android over existing phone OS 's are threefold : 1. cost... there is no cost to the manufacturer of the phone or the carrier.2 .
compatibility... applications for Android will be compatable with other manufacturers Android handsets , so different manufacturers will compete on quality of their product rather than the amount of software available.3 .
features... Android was developed to be very feature rich , of course manufacturers can disable features but if they want them it is trivial to enable them .
If the public begins to demand additional features as ideas change , then Android can be upgraded to include those features.Essentially , there were no phone OS 's that manufacturers could even purchase that would result in a product so refined that it could compete with Apple and Blackberry , and neither of them were licensing their code .
Android changes that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't understand what is happening at all.Right now there are 100's of phones on the market, all running some sort of OS.
Each of them appeal to different audiences, with different features, reliability, and carrier compatability.Essentially, some of those 100's of current models are being replaced with models running Android.
Android is an operating system, it does not define the device it runs upon.
Just like I can run Linux using just a tty interface over a serial link, or I can run it with a 3d desktop across multiple screens; Android can be similarly used for different phones.The advantages of Android over existing phone OS's are threefold:1. cost... there is no cost to the manufacturer of the phone or the carrier.2.
compatibility... applications for Android will be compatable with other manufacturers Android handsets, so different manufacturers will compete on quality of their product rather than the amount of software available.3.
features... Android was developed to be very feature rich, of course manufacturers can disable features but if they want them it is trivial to enable them.
If the public begins to demand additional features as ideas change, then Android can be upgraded to include those features.Essentially, there were no phone OS's that manufacturers could even purchase that would result in a product so refined that it could compete with Apple and Blackberry, and neither of them were licensing their code.
Android changes that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29819903</id>
	<title>Re:Battery Life is the problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256065200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bought a bigger battery at the same time I bought my G1 because of reviews of bad battery life, so I have never used the original battery.  With the extended battery it lasts about 3 days with light usage.  And over 12 hours of continuous usage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought a bigger battery at the same time I bought my G1 because of reviews of bad battery life , so I have never used the original battery .
With the extended battery it lasts about 3 days with light usage .
And over 12 hours of continuous usage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought a bigger battery at the same time I bought my G1 because of reviews of bad battery life, so I have never used the original battery.
With the extended battery it lasts about 3 days with light usage.
And over 12 hours of continuous usage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807625</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256052000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Motorola Droid (not out yet I think) is supposed to have a 5 megapixel camera, auto focus and flash.  I have not heard much about the picture quality.  On the up side:  the camera GUI, auto focus, and responsiveness have significantly improved on my G1 with every update.  In good light on a mostly still subject the G1 takes acceptable pictures.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Motorola Droid ( not out yet I think ) is supposed to have a 5 megapixel camera , auto focus and flash .
I have not heard much about the picture quality .
On the up side : the camera GUI , auto focus , and responsiveness have significantly improved on my G1 with every update .
In good light on a mostly still subject the G1 takes acceptable pictures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Motorola Droid (not out yet I think) is supposed to have a 5 megapixel camera, auto focus and flash.
I have not heard much about the picture quality.
On the up side:  the camera GUI, auto focus, and responsiveness have significantly improved on my G1 with every update.
In good light on a mostly still subject the G1 takes acceptable pictures.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809637</id>
	<title>Re:Carriers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256058780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>In reality, today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS, Web OS, the iPhone OS, and Windows Mobile on their phones.</i></p><p>Who pays to use the iphone's crippled OS?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In reality , today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS , Web OS , the iPhone OS , and Windows Mobile on their phones.Who pays to use the iphone 's crippled OS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In reality, today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS, Web OS, the iPhone OS, and Windows Mobile on their phones.Who pays to use the iphone's crippled OS?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810103</id>
	<title>Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1256060340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually the speed of android becomes better with every release, and I think one of the big issues in the default installs is the default install itself, the what you describe is a problem of no proper swap space. There are several hacks regarding adding a swap space on the SD, that + a fast SD should to the trick to speed up the messages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually the speed of android becomes better with every release , and I think one of the big issues in the default installs is the default install itself , the what you describe is a problem of no proper swap space .
There are several hacks regarding adding a swap space on the SD , that + a fast SD should to the trick to speed up the messages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually the speed of android becomes better with every release, and I think one of the big issues in the default installs is the default install itself, the what you describe is a problem of no proper swap space.
There are several hacks regarding adding a swap space on the SD, that + a fast SD should to the trick to speed up the messages.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811843</id>
	<title>Re:Features I want First.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256066220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think most of your concerns will be solved with the droid from VZW, it's using the same CPU type as the iphone 3GS and the Pre, and it has a physical keyboard...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think most of your concerns will be solved with the droid from VZW , it 's using the same CPU type as the iphone 3GS and the Pre , and it has a physical keyboard.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think most of your concerns will be solved with the droid from VZW, it's using the same CPU type as the iphone 3GS and the Pre, and it has a physical keyboard...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29821977</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>swillden</author>
	<datestamp>1256132040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, even though standards have stayed more or less the same, the capabilities of even our worst cameras have increased by orders of magnitude. At some point, even a cell-phone camera is good enough to do what needs to be done, and any more technical improvement is just for dick-waving and specialized cases.</p></div><p>The fundamental problem with cell phone cameras is size.  You just need bigger lenses to get good image quality.  Ansel Adams may have used cameras that were technically far less sophisticated, but he had cameras that were much LARGER.  In optics, size matters.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , even though standards have stayed more or less the same , the capabilities of even our worst cameras have increased by orders of magnitude .
At some point , even a cell-phone camera is good enough to do what needs to be done , and any more technical improvement is just for dick-waving and specialized cases.The fundamental problem with cell phone cameras is size .
You just need bigger lenses to get good image quality .
Ansel Adams may have used cameras that were technically far less sophisticated , but he had cameras that were much LARGER .
In optics , size matters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, even though standards have stayed more or less the same, the capabilities of even our worst cameras have increased by orders of magnitude.
At some point, even a cell-phone camera is good enough to do what needs to be done, and any more technical improvement is just for dick-waving and specialized cases.The fundamental problem with cell phone cameras is size.
You just need bigger lenses to get good image quality.
Ansel Adams may have used cameras that were technically far less sophisticated, but he had cameras that were much LARGER.
In optics, size matters.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809653</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812011</id>
	<title>Decent screen size?</title>
	<author>Baki</author>
	<datestamp>1256066760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The smaller screen size (I think 3.2 inch is maximum) of android phones is what kept me stuck with my iphone until now. I think the iphone screen is just right: still not too big to carry arround, but just big enough for websites. I wouldn't settle for a 1/10th of an inch less, but move away from mac app-store and itunes close-in immediately.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The smaller screen size ( I think 3.2 inch is maximum ) of android phones is what kept me stuck with my iphone until now .
I think the iphone screen is just right : still not too big to carry arround , but just big enough for websites .
I would n't settle for a 1/10th of an inch less , but move away from mac app-store and itunes close-in immediately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The smaller screen size (I think 3.2 inch is maximum) of android phones is what kept me stuck with my iphone until now.
I think the iphone screen is just right: still not too big to carry arround, but just big enough for websites.
I wouldn't settle for a 1/10th of an inch less, but move away from mac app-store and itunes close-in immediately.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810375</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder if this will help the app ecosystem</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1256061180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually the reason there are so many apps for the iphone has the tremendous gold rush hype apple was able to start. Android already has a load of applications around 9000 many of them free, I dont think the problem is a s big as windows. The main issue in Windows and J2ME is the API diversity there have been so many vendor extensions that it became really hard to provide a load of applications. J2ME was more prone to this than Windows, in windows the issue was the lack of a central marketplace. WinCE also has a load of applications (probably 20.000-30.000) but there is no central place to download them.<br>Google has the huge advantage of having good control over the APIs unlike Sun with J2ME hence they can keep the API stable, the also dont have to deal with backward compatibility so they can tackle things like 3d resolution indepdendend widgets etc.. from the beginning, and so far they have done a good job!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually the reason there are so many apps for the iphone has the tremendous gold rush hype apple was able to start .
Android already has a load of applications around 9000 many of them free , I dont think the problem is a s big as windows .
The main issue in Windows and J2ME is the API diversity there have been so many vendor extensions that it became really hard to provide a load of applications .
J2ME was more prone to this than Windows , in windows the issue was the lack of a central marketplace .
WinCE also has a load of applications ( probably 20.000-30.000 ) but there is no central place to download them.Google has the huge advantage of having good control over the APIs unlike Sun with J2ME hence they can keep the API stable , the also dont have to deal with backward compatibility so they can tackle things like 3d resolution indepdendend widgets etc.. from the beginning , and so far they have done a good job !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually the reason there are so many apps for the iphone has the tremendous gold rush hype apple was able to start.
Android already has a load of applications around 9000 many of them free, I dont think the problem is a s big as windows.
The main issue in Windows and J2ME is the API diversity there have been so many vendor extensions that it became really hard to provide a load of applications.
J2ME was more prone to this than Windows, in windows the issue was the lack of a central marketplace.
WinCE also has a load of applications (probably 20.000-30.000) but there is no central place to download them.Google has the huge advantage of having good control over the APIs unlike Sun with J2ME hence they can keep the API stable, the also dont have to deal with backward compatibility so they can tackle things like 3d resolution indepdendend widgets etc.. from the beginning, and so far they have done a good job!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807701</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818011</id>
	<title>How do you deal with different sized screens?</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1256050380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The same way you always should have.</p><p>You stop assuming you can specify things in pixels.  Only a very few things should directly map to physical pixels on the display, and icons, controls, text, and modal dialogs aren't on that list.  Even raster images should only map to literal pixels under certain circumstances.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The same way you always should have.You stop assuming you can specify things in pixels .
Only a very few things should directly map to physical pixels on the display , and icons , controls , text , and modal dialogs are n't on that list .
Even raster images should only map to literal pixels under certain circumstances .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same way you always should have.You stop assuming you can specify things in pixels.
Only a very few things should directly map to physical pixels on the display, and icons, controls, text, and modal dialogs aren't on that list.
Even raster images should only map to literal pixels under certain circumstances.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997</id>
	<title>Worst thing that could happen for Android</title>
	<author>khchung</author>
	<datestamp>1256053500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>50+ Android phones coming?!</p><p>Is it for real?  IMO, this would be the worst thing that could happen for the Android platform!</p><p>Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions of Linux on the shelf!  Each with different features, strengths and price (not free for the sake of analogy). He would be confused and do not know how to choose!</p><p>Good luck sorting out the features of different phones and the compatibility/usability of different apps among them.  It would be worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC.</p><p>Having 100+ models works for ordinary mobile phones, as you mostly do not expect to install any extra software other than which comes with the phone.  With a "smartphone" (I hate the term) that is practically a mini-PC, there is value in keeping a small set of uniform performance/feature profile.  It is the same trade-off between PC gaming vs console gaming.</p><p>With two or three strong Android models, it has a chance of overtaking iPhone.  With 50+ different models, average Joe is not going to bother to sort them out and just buy an iPhone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>50 + Android phones coming ?
! Is it for real ?
IMO , this would be the worst thing that could happen for the Android platform ! Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50 + different distributions of Linux on the shelf !
Each with different features , strengths and price ( not free for the sake of analogy ) .
He would be confused and do not know how to choose ! Good luck sorting out the features of different phones and the compatibility/usability of different apps among them .
It would be worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC.Having 100 + models works for ordinary mobile phones , as you mostly do not expect to install any extra software other than which comes with the phone .
With a " smartphone " ( I hate the term ) that is practically a mini-PC , there is value in keeping a small set of uniform performance/feature profile .
It is the same trade-off between PC gaming vs console gaming.With two or three strong Android models , it has a chance of overtaking iPhone .
With 50 + different models , average Joe is not going to bother to sort them out and just buy an iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>50+ Android phones coming?
!Is it for real?
IMO, this would be the worst thing that could happen for the Android platform!Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions of Linux on the shelf!
Each with different features, strengths and price (not free for the sake of analogy).
He would be confused and do not know how to choose!Good luck sorting out the features of different phones and the compatibility/usability of different apps among them.
It would be worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC.Having 100+ models works for ordinary mobile phones, as you mostly do not expect to install any extra software other than which comes with the phone.
With a "smartphone" (I hate the term) that is practically a mini-PC, there is value in keeping a small set of uniform performance/feature profile.
It is the same trade-off between PC gaming vs console gaming.With two or three strong Android models, it has a chance of overtaking iPhone.
With 50+ different models, average Joe is not going to bother to sort them out and just buy an iPhone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813581</id>
	<title>Branding and OEM problems like Symbian and WinMo</title>
	<author>MMInterface</author>
	<datestamp>1256029980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Right now there are 100's of phones on the market, all running some sort of OS. Each of them appeal to different audiences, with different features, reliability, and carrier compatability.</p></div><p>The OEMs that support Android will continue to support the other OS's so this might compound that problem for average consumers.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Essentially, some of those 100's of current models are being replaced with models running Android. Android is an operating system, it does not define the device it runs upon. Just like I can run Linux using just a tty interface over a serial link, or I can run it with a 3d desktop across multiple screens; Android can be similarly used for different phones.</p></div><p>Yes and part of the problem are the devices that Android runs on.  Another problem is the branding. If Android is just an OS it will not have the branding and luxury power of the IPhone. This may not matter to me but it will affect sales. This is great, but it is also a weakness when competing with a complete package like BB or IPhone.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The advantages of Android over existing phone OS's are threefold: 1. cost... there is no cost to the manufacturer of the phone or the carrier.</p> </div><p>This is a benefit has not and probably will not be received by the consumer.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>2. compatibility... applications for Android will be compatable with other manufacturers Android handsets,</p> </div><p>Same thing with WinMo. But that doesn't really matter if you find Apple, Blackberry, or Nokia hardware more attractive.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>so different manufacturers will compete on quality of their product rather than the amount of software available.</p> </div><p>I don't see any indication that this is true. I wish it were true, that's the only reason it sounds good.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>3. features... Android was developed to be very feature rich, of course manufacturers can disable features but if they want them it is trivial to enable them. If the public begins to demand additional features as ideas change, then Android can be upgraded to include those features.</p></div><p>Manufactures can and do enable disable features on WinMo easily. The problem is the driving forces behind this comes down to money. What the consumer wants is not always more profitable. Now giving this power to the consumer, in a user friendly manner would be a real benefit.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Essentially, there were no phone OS's that manufacturers could even purchase that would result in a product so refined that it could compete with Apple and Blackberry, and neither of them were licensing their code. Android changes that.</p></div><p>True, but the OEMs are running Android on hardware that isn't as refined and their OS customizations (ex HTC Home screens Today screens) drastically degrade performance.

I think what people are failing to see is that Android has the same problems that WinMo and Symbian based OSs have. One is branding, the other is the hardware. The fact is there will always be a large portion of people who prefer an Apple or RIM device over and HTC or Samsung one, and it won't matter what features are involved. Many consumers, not the ones here, but ones that aren't as tech savvy are going to identify more with the hardware than the OS. In that case they often won't care or know which of the 3 OS's come on their new Samsung smartphone. Another thing you are forgetting is that the OEMs that make Android devices are the same ones iPhone and BB users are not satisfied with. Android will come with whatever weaknesses Samsung, HTC, Motorola, LG etc introduce via hardware and even their own OEM OS customizations. I'm an Android user myself. The platform is great, but I think people are missing the marketing power of a complete package that has luxury appeal, and these are benefits that Android does not have.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right now there are 100 's of phones on the market , all running some sort of OS .
Each of them appeal to different audiences , with different features , reliability , and carrier compatability.The OEMs that support Android will continue to support the other OS 's so this might compound that problem for average consumers.Essentially , some of those 100 's of current models are being replaced with models running Android .
Android is an operating system , it does not define the device it runs upon .
Just like I can run Linux using just a tty interface over a serial link , or I can run it with a 3d desktop across multiple screens ; Android can be similarly used for different phones.Yes and part of the problem are the devices that Android runs on .
Another problem is the branding .
If Android is just an OS it will not have the branding and luxury power of the IPhone .
This may not matter to me but it will affect sales .
This is great , but it is also a weakness when competing with a complete package like BB or IPhone.The advantages of Android over existing phone OS 's are threefold : 1. cost... there is no cost to the manufacturer of the phone or the carrier .
This is a benefit has not and probably will not be received by the consumer.2 .
compatibility... applications for Android will be compatable with other manufacturers Android handsets , Same thing with WinMo .
But that does n't really matter if you find Apple , Blackberry , or Nokia hardware more attractive.so different manufacturers will compete on quality of their product rather than the amount of software available .
I do n't see any indication that this is true .
I wish it were true , that 's the only reason it sounds good.3 .
features... Android was developed to be very feature rich , of course manufacturers can disable features but if they want them it is trivial to enable them .
If the public begins to demand additional features as ideas change , then Android can be upgraded to include those features.Manufactures can and do enable disable features on WinMo easily .
The problem is the driving forces behind this comes down to money .
What the consumer wants is not always more profitable .
Now giving this power to the consumer , in a user friendly manner would be a real benefit.Essentially , there were no phone OS 's that manufacturers could even purchase that would result in a product so refined that it could compete with Apple and Blackberry , and neither of them were licensing their code .
Android changes that.True , but the OEMs are running Android on hardware that is n't as refined and their OS customizations ( ex HTC Home screens Today screens ) drastically degrade performance .
I think what people are failing to see is that Android has the same problems that WinMo and Symbian based OSs have .
One is branding , the other is the hardware .
The fact is there will always be a large portion of people who prefer an Apple or RIM device over and HTC or Samsung one , and it wo n't matter what features are involved .
Many consumers , not the ones here , but ones that are n't as tech savvy are going to identify more with the hardware than the OS .
In that case they often wo n't care or know which of the 3 OS 's come on their new Samsung smartphone .
Another thing you are forgetting is that the OEMs that make Android devices are the same ones iPhone and BB users are not satisfied with .
Android will come with whatever weaknesses Samsung , HTC , Motorola , LG etc introduce via hardware and even their own OEM OS customizations .
I 'm an Android user myself .
The platform is great , but I think people are missing the marketing power of a complete package that has luxury appeal , and these are benefits that Android does not have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right now there are 100's of phones on the market, all running some sort of OS.
Each of them appeal to different audiences, with different features, reliability, and carrier compatability.The OEMs that support Android will continue to support the other OS's so this might compound that problem for average consumers.Essentially, some of those 100's of current models are being replaced with models running Android.
Android is an operating system, it does not define the device it runs upon.
Just like I can run Linux using just a tty interface over a serial link, or I can run it with a 3d desktop across multiple screens; Android can be similarly used for different phones.Yes and part of the problem are the devices that Android runs on.
Another problem is the branding.
If Android is just an OS it will not have the branding and luxury power of the IPhone.
This may not matter to me but it will affect sales.
This is great, but it is also a weakness when competing with a complete package like BB or IPhone.The advantages of Android over existing phone OS's are threefold: 1. cost... there is no cost to the manufacturer of the phone or the carrier.
This is a benefit has not and probably will not be received by the consumer.2.
compatibility... applications for Android will be compatable with other manufacturers Android handsets, Same thing with WinMo.
But that doesn't really matter if you find Apple, Blackberry, or Nokia hardware more attractive.so different manufacturers will compete on quality of their product rather than the amount of software available.
I don't see any indication that this is true.
I wish it were true, that's the only reason it sounds good.3.
features... Android was developed to be very feature rich, of course manufacturers can disable features but if they want them it is trivial to enable them.
If the public begins to demand additional features as ideas change, then Android can be upgraded to include those features.Manufactures can and do enable disable features on WinMo easily.
The problem is the driving forces behind this comes down to money.
What the consumer wants is not always more profitable.
Now giving this power to the consumer, in a user friendly manner would be a real benefit.Essentially, there were no phone OS's that manufacturers could even purchase that would result in a product so refined that it could compete with Apple and Blackberry, and neither of them were licensing their code.
Android changes that.True, but the OEMs are running Android on hardware that isn't as refined and their OS customizations (ex HTC Home screens Today screens) drastically degrade performance.
I think what people are failing to see is that Android has the same problems that WinMo and Symbian based OSs have.
One is branding, the other is the hardware.
The fact is there will always be a large portion of people who prefer an Apple or RIM device over and HTC or Samsung one, and it won't matter what features are involved.
Many consumers, not the ones here, but ones that aren't as tech savvy are going to identify more with the hardware than the OS.
In that case they often won't care or know which of the 3 OS's come on their new Samsung smartphone.
Another thing you are forgetting is that the OEMs that make Android devices are the same ones iPhone and BB users are not satisfied with.
Android will come with whatever weaknesses Samsung, HTC, Motorola, LG etc introduce via hardware and even their own OEM OS customizations.
I'm an Android user myself.
The platform is great, but I think people are missing the marketing power of a complete package that has luxury appeal, and these are benefits that Android does not have.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807691</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>KlaymenDK</author>
	<datestamp>1256052240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The camera in my Galaxy is actually surprisingly good. However (and unsurprisingly), it doesn't have red-eye reduction and such photography modes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The camera in my Galaxy is actually surprisingly good .
However ( and unsurprisingly ) , it does n't have red-eye reduction and such photography modes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The camera in my Galaxy is actually surprisingly good.
However (and unsurprisingly), it doesn't have red-eye reduction and such photography modes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29815407</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256036400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about Maemo?  Other than it being tablet oriented.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about Maemo ?
Other than it being tablet oriented .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about Maemo?
Other than it being tablet oriented.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810805</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Alef</author>
	<datestamp>1256062740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Putting it in other words: The resolution bottleneck is not the pixel size, but the optics. The extra pixels are probably meaningless (unless maybe in a bright scene) since the actual resolution in the image content is lower, and this is reflected by the fact that you remove high frequencies (noise) immediately after capturing the image, effectively reducing the number of pixels.
</p><p>
Another interesting fact is that the pixels size is approaching the wavelength of the light it is trying to absorb. Putting 3000 pixels across 6 mm means you get 2 microns of space for each pixel, which is less than three times the wavelength of red light (~700 nm). However, in reality you will never have 100\% fill factor so the actual pixels will have to be something like 1,4 microns. Already we are down to only twice the wavelength, and this would be for a 5 MP camera.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Putting it in other words : The resolution bottleneck is not the pixel size , but the optics .
The extra pixels are probably meaningless ( unless maybe in a bright scene ) since the actual resolution in the image content is lower , and this is reflected by the fact that you remove high frequencies ( noise ) immediately after capturing the image , effectively reducing the number of pixels .
Another interesting fact is that the pixels size is approaching the wavelength of the light it is trying to absorb .
Putting 3000 pixels across 6 mm means you get 2 microns of space for each pixel , which is less than three times the wavelength of red light ( ~ 700 nm ) .
However , in reality you will never have 100 \ % fill factor so the actual pixels will have to be something like 1,4 microns .
Already we are down to only twice the wavelength , and this would be for a 5 MP camera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Putting it in other words: The resolution bottleneck is not the pixel size, but the optics.
The extra pixels are probably meaningless (unless maybe in a bright scene) since the actual resolution in the image content is lower, and this is reflected by the fact that you remove high frequencies (noise) immediately after capturing the image, effectively reducing the number of pixels.
Another interesting fact is that the pixels size is approaching the wavelength of the light it is trying to absorb.
Putting 3000 pixels across 6 mm means you get 2 microns of space for each pixel, which is less than three times the wavelength of red light (~700 nm).
However, in reality you will never have 100\% fill factor so the actual pixels will have to be something like 1,4 microns.
Already we are down to only twice the wavelength, and this would be for a 5 MP camera.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808569</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder if this will help the app ecosystem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256055540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First, WinMo, just like PalmOS, probably have way more apps than the iPhone. The problem is that most of them sucks and good ones are difficult to find. Good thing is that you don't have to pay MS a 30\% tax, and that you can run your own apps without "jailbraking" your phone/pda.<br>Second, the iPhone is new. Wait 5-10 years. You will see apps that only run on the latest iPhone2 5G SSS with OS 9.0.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , WinMo , just like PalmOS , probably have way more apps than the iPhone .
The problem is that most of them sucks and good ones are difficult to find .
Good thing is that you do n't have to pay MS a 30 \ % tax , and that you can run your own apps without " jailbraking " your phone/pda.Second , the iPhone is new .
Wait 5-10 years .
You will see apps that only run on the latest iPhone2 5G SSS with OS 9.0 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, WinMo, just like PalmOS, probably have way more apps than the iPhone.
The problem is that most of them sucks and good ones are difficult to find.
Good thing is that you don't have to pay MS a 30\% tax, and that you can run your own apps without "jailbraking" your phone/pda.Second, the iPhone is new.
Wait 5-10 years.
You will see apps that only run on the latest iPhone2 5G SSS with OS 9.0.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807701</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811595</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1256065500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depends on your definition of "decent". If you compare e.g. modern Nokia or Sony-Ericsson (K series) camera phones to cheap digital cameras, they are practically equal. Which is to be expected, since they use the same parts. But if you define decent as DSLR, as I do, of course all those mentioned are not decent.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Point is: For most people, the normal camera in the phone suffices. They can't see the difference anyway. Or it does not matter enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends on your definition of " decent " .
If you compare e.g .
modern Nokia or Sony-Ericsson ( K series ) camera phones to cheap digital cameras , they are practically equal .
Which is to be expected , since they use the same parts .
But if you define decent as DSLR , as I do , of course all those mentioned are not decent .
: ) Point is : For most people , the normal camera in the phone suffices .
They ca n't see the difference anyway .
Or it does not matter enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends on your definition of "decent".
If you compare e.g.
modern Nokia or Sony-Ericsson (K series) camera phones to cheap digital cameras, they are practically equal.
Which is to be expected, since they use the same parts.
But if you define decent as DSLR, as I do, of course all those mentioned are not decent.
:)Point is: For most people, the normal camera in the phone suffices.
They can't see the difference anyway.
Or it does not matter enough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820957</id>
	<title>But will it allow native development??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256122380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been reading about exciting devices that will be released with Android for quite some time now. I am a developer and I am more interested in the device as a developer than I am as an end user. iPhone has a lot of roadblocks for me, I need a Mac to develop on it, which is a huge cost for me at the moment. Apple's policy about publishing apps is another story which has been discussed a lot.<br>The problem is; even if Android is emphasizing openness, its development model seems to be "we know what is good for you". As far as I can see, there is no low level access to device for developers, and you are supposed to use Java, with some JNI capabilities for process intensive tasks. Native code can only be isolated chunks which still can't access device using C/C++.<br>This is most likely to ensure that code runs on all devices, but this is a choice that should be left to the developer, at least if you're claiming that your platform is open. If I decide to develop something on a particular phone, knowing that it may not work in the same way on other devices, this is my choice, and I should have this option.<br>For whatever reason I have, I want to have native apis for C/C++ and Android does not seem to offer this. Maybe my money is not that important, but for things like gaming, which will probably be huge on the iPhone quite soon, this will be a problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been reading about exciting devices that will be released with Android for quite some time now .
I am a developer and I am more interested in the device as a developer than I am as an end user .
iPhone has a lot of roadblocks for me , I need a Mac to develop on it , which is a huge cost for me at the moment .
Apple 's policy about publishing apps is another story which has been discussed a lot.The problem is ; even if Android is emphasizing openness , its development model seems to be " we know what is good for you " .
As far as I can see , there is no low level access to device for developers , and you are supposed to use Java , with some JNI capabilities for process intensive tasks .
Native code can only be isolated chunks which still ca n't access device using C/C + + .This is most likely to ensure that code runs on all devices , but this is a choice that should be left to the developer , at least if you 're claiming that your platform is open .
If I decide to develop something on a particular phone , knowing that it may not work in the same way on other devices , this is my choice , and I should have this option.For whatever reason I have , I want to have native apis for C/C + + and Android does not seem to offer this .
Maybe my money is not that important , but for things like gaming , which will probably be huge on the iPhone quite soon , this will be a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been reading about exciting devices that will be released with Android for quite some time now.
I am a developer and I am more interested in the device as a developer than I am as an end user.
iPhone has a lot of roadblocks for me, I need a Mac to develop on it, which is a huge cost for me at the moment.
Apple's policy about publishing apps is another story which has been discussed a lot.The problem is; even if Android is emphasizing openness, its development model seems to be "we know what is good for you".
As far as I can see, there is no low level access to device for developers, and you are supposed to use Java, with some JNI capabilities for process intensive tasks.
Native code can only be isolated chunks which still can't access device using C/C++.This is most likely to ensure that code runs on all devices, but this is a choice that should be left to the developer, at least if you're claiming that your platform is open.
If I decide to develop something on a particular phone, knowing that it may not work in the same way on other devices, this is my choice, and I should have this option.For whatever reason I have, I want to have native apis for C/C++ and Android does not seem to offer this.
Maybe my money is not that important, but for things like gaming, which will probably be huge on the iPhone quite soon, this will be a problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808863</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>sarhjinian</author>
	<datestamp>1256056380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More choice also means "too many cooks" syndrome.  We saw this with Windows Mobile, where the core system (which, admittedly, had problems of it's own) was further crippled by vendor- and carrier-specific addons, some of which changed the UI significantly and many of which didn't integrate at all well with the base system (HTC TouchhFlo comes to mind).</p><p>Android is seeing something similar: HTC's offerings use a different UI depending on their version (some use the base Android system, some use HTC's Sense UI).  Motorola uses something different.  Not all phones use Android's mail client (some use HTC mail; and no, not all HTCs use HTC mail).  Many phones bundle additional applications to manage the dialer, the radio, and more.  And then the carriers get their grubby hands on it and pervert it further, such that otherwise identical phones on two different carriers behave quite differently.  Android, to it's credit, is nowhere near as bad as WM is, but it's still young, and the cracks are starting to show.</p><p>The hardware platform may be shaping up into something like the PC market, but the software market is committing the same kind of marketing hari kari that killed UNIX as a unified platform and continues to cripple Linux today.  Choice is good for some users, but by and large these devices are going to end up in the hands a "normal people" who have no patience for the complications that this value-added crap brings.  And then there's Google's haphazard implementation (you can't buy apps in some countries, or under some carriers; some apps are restricted per-carrier) to further hamper things.</p><p>Then there's the significantly weaker marketing effort: instead of a unified "Google Phone" which is a strong brand, you have HTC, Samsung, Motorola and others, all with different branding and marketing.  Few, if any, making any effort to promote the Android or Google brands; heck, many users are likely unaware that they have a common platform and app store.  Even Microsoft does a better job than this, and RIM and Palm certainly do.</p><p>By comparison, an iPhone is an iPhone is an iPhone.  The marketing is strong, the platform unified and the carriers keep their sticky fingers off it.  The app store is well understood and universal.  There's choice, but it's nicely balanced against complexity---which is important, since this isn't 1985 and we're dealing with a different market: it's not hobbyists and businesses and early adopters, it's millions and millions of schmoes, and trying to duplicate the Microsoft/Intel strategy of nearly three decades ago isn't necessarily a good idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More choice also means " too many cooks " syndrome .
We saw this with Windows Mobile , where the core system ( which , admittedly , had problems of it 's own ) was further crippled by vendor- and carrier-specific addons , some of which changed the UI significantly and many of which did n't integrate at all well with the base system ( HTC TouchhFlo comes to mind ) .Android is seeing something similar : HTC 's offerings use a different UI depending on their version ( some use the base Android system , some use HTC 's Sense UI ) .
Motorola uses something different .
Not all phones use Android 's mail client ( some use HTC mail ; and no , not all HTCs use HTC mail ) .
Many phones bundle additional applications to manage the dialer , the radio , and more .
And then the carriers get their grubby hands on it and pervert it further , such that otherwise identical phones on two different carriers behave quite differently .
Android , to it 's credit , is nowhere near as bad as WM is , but it 's still young , and the cracks are starting to show.The hardware platform may be shaping up into something like the PC market , but the software market is committing the same kind of marketing hari kari that killed UNIX as a unified platform and continues to cripple Linux today .
Choice is good for some users , but by and large these devices are going to end up in the hands a " normal people " who have no patience for the complications that this value-added crap brings .
And then there 's Google 's haphazard implementation ( you ca n't buy apps in some countries , or under some carriers ; some apps are restricted per-carrier ) to further hamper things.Then there 's the significantly weaker marketing effort : instead of a unified " Google Phone " which is a strong brand , you have HTC , Samsung , Motorola and others , all with different branding and marketing .
Few , if any , making any effort to promote the Android or Google brands ; heck , many users are likely unaware that they have a common platform and app store .
Even Microsoft does a better job than this , and RIM and Palm certainly do.By comparison , an iPhone is an iPhone is an iPhone .
The marketing is strong , the platform unified and the carriers keep their sticky fingers off it .
The app store is well understood and universal .
There 's choice , but it 's nicely balanced against complexity---which is important , since this is n't 1985 and we 're dealing with a different market : it 's not hobbyists and businesses and early adopters , it 's millions and millions of schmoes , and trying to duplicate the Microsoft/Intel strategy of nearly three decades ago is n't necessarily a good idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More choice also means "too many cooks" syndrome.
We saw this with Windows Mobile, where the core system (which, admittedly, had problems of it's own) was further crippled by vendor- and carrier-specific addons, some of which changed the UI significantly and many of which didn't integrate at all well with the base system (HTC TouchhFlo comes to mind).Android is seeing something similar: HTC's offerings use a different UI depending on their version (some use the base Android system, some use HTC's Sense UI).
Motorola uses something different.
Not all phones use Android's mail client (some use HTC mail; and no, not all HTCs use HTC mail).
Many phones bundle additional applications to manage the dialer, the radio, and more.
And then the carriers get their grubby hands on it and pervert it further, such that otherwise identical phones on two different carriers behave quite differently.
Android, to it's credit, is nowhere near as bad as WM is, but it's still young, and the cracks are starting to show.The hardware platform may be shaping up into something like the PC market, but the software market is committing the same kind of marketing hari kari that killed UNIX as a unified platform and continues to cripple Linux today.
Choice is good for some users, but by and large these devices are going to end up in the hands a "normal people" who have no patience for the complications that this value-added crap brings.
And then there's Google's haphazard implementation (you can't buy apps in some countries, or under some carriers; some apps are restricted per-carrier) to further hamper things.Then there's the significantly weaker marketing effort: instead of a unified "Google Phone" which is a strong brand, you have HTC, Samsung, Motorola and others, all with different branding and marketing.
Few, if any, making any effort to promote the Android or Google brands; heck, many users are likely unaware that they have a common platform and app store.
Even Microsoft does a better job than this, and RIM and Palm certainly do.By comparison, an iPhone is an iPhone is an iPhone.
The marketing is strong, the platform unified and the carriers keep their sticky fingers off it.
The app store is well understood and universal.
There's choice, but it's nicely balanced against complexity---which is important, since this isn't 1985 and we're dealing with a different market: it's not hobbyists and businesses and early adopters, it's millions and millions of schmoes, and trying to duplicate the Microsoft/Intel strategy of nearly three decades ago isn't necessarily a good idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807767</id>
	<title>Re:Just 50?</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1256052480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We will have to see...  Apple could repeat old history and make the first popular mainstream smartphone (like they did with the Apple II) Get good market share then have a competitor with a more open solution take over the market.   Or what could happen is all the carriers who wants to make sure they don't blow it like IBM did. Will keep Android Locked down and each version incompatible with each other, so in essence keeping a bunch of branches of Android which won't work seamlessly.  Allowing Apple to keep the main market share. As the carriers keep their control by keeping every android version locked to themselfs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We will have to see... Apple could repeat old history and make the first popular mainstream smartphone ( like they did with the Apple II ) Get good market share then have a competitor with a more open solution take over the market .
Or what could happen is all the carriers who wants to make sure they do n't blow it like IBM did .
Will keep Android Locked down and each version incompatible with each other , so in essence keeping a bunch of branches of Android which wo n't work seamlessly .
Allowing Apple to keep the main market share .
As the carriers keep their control by keeping every android version locked to themselfs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We will have to see...  Apple could repeat old history and make the first popular mainstream smartphone (like they did with the Apple II) Get good market share then have a competitor with a more open solution take over the market.
Or what could happen is all the carriers who wants to make sure they don't blow it like IBM did.
Will keep Android Locked down and each version incompatible with each other, so in essence keeping a bunch of branches of Android which won't work seamlessly.
Allowing Apple to keep the main market share.
As the carriers keep their control by keeping every android version locked to themselfs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807447</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809705</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Antique Geekmeister</author>
	<datestamp>1256059080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It also means more likelihood of \_detecting\_ the photons with which to record and generate your data. The trade-off is not so obvious as you portray it, or actual film cameras with coarse grained film would produce superior pictures.</p><p>One underlying issue is the stability of the camera: without a large body, and without the intensity of a flash, the pixels need a longer temporal sample to record a reliable signal, one that won't be "smoothed out" by such averaging algorithms. Unfortunately, cameras tremble, with the trembling of ordinary muscles, with your pulse, with the swaying of our body that you do to stay upright. a finer resolution can make the wiggling more apparent. This is why tripods can be so helpful, and heavier cameras easier to keep focused than light ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It also means more likelihood of \ _detecting \ _ the photons with which to record and generate your data .
The trade-off is not so obvious as you portray it , or actual film cameras with coarse grained film would produce superior pictures.One underlying issue is the stability of the camera : without a large body , and without the intensity of a flash , the pixels need a longer temporal sample to record a reliable signal , one that wo n't be " smoothed out " by such averaging algorithms .
Unfortunately , cameras tremble , with the trembling of ordinary muscles , with your pulse , with the swaying of our body that you do to stay upright .
a finer resolution can make the wiggling more apparent .
This is why tripods can be so helpful , and heavier cameras easier to keep focused than light ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It also means more likelihood of \_detecting\_ the photons with which to record and generate your data.
The trade-off is not so obvious as you portray it, or actual film cameras with coarse grained film would produce superior pictures.One underlying issue is the stability of the camera: without a large body, and without the intensity of a flash, the pixels need a longer temporal sample to record a reliable signal, one that won't be "smoothed out" by such averaging algorithms.
Unfortunately, cameras tremble, with the trembling of ordinary muscles, with your pulse, with the swaying of our body that you do to stay upright.
a finer resolution can make the wiggling more apparent.
This is why tripods can be so helpful, and heavier cameras easier to keep focused than light ones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820843</id>
	<title>Re:Battery Life is the problem</title>
	<author>cboslin</author>
	<datestamp>1256121300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Battery life is a big issue for all WiFi enabled handhelds, including the Nokia Nxxx series.  My solution was easy, plug it in at work and plug it in at home.  Pretty much have phone access approx 80 - 90\% of the time.  If I am commuting, anyone calling can leave a message and I will get it when I connect to WiFi the next time.

<p>Best of all, with Skype my total cost of ownership is $100 per year.  I use to pay more than that per month for a cellular phone.  Stopped doing that over 3 years ago and never intend to go back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Battery life is a big issue for all WiFi enabled handhelds , including the Nokia Nxxx series .
My solution was easy , plug it in at work and plug it in at home .
Pretty much have phone access approx 80 - 90 \ % of the time .
If I am commuting , anyone calling can leave a message and I will get it when I connect to WiFi the next time .
Best of all , with Skype my total cost of ownership is $ 100 per year .
I use to pay more than that per month for a cellular phone .
Stopped doing that over 3 years ago and never intend to go back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Battery life is a big issue for all WiFi enabled handhelds, including the Nokia Nxxx series.
My solution was easy, plug it in at work and plug it in at home.
Pretty much have phone access approx 80 - 90\% of the time.
If I am commuting, anyone calling can leave a message and I will get it when I connect to WiFi the next time.
Best of all, with Skype my total cost of ownership is $100 per year.
I use to pay more than that per month for a cellular phone.
Stopped doing that over 3 years ago and never intend to go back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820593</id>
	<title>Re:Features I want First.</title>
	<author>SoupIsGoodFood\_42</author>
	<datestamp>1256117640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want a decent flash, and not just some ultra bright LED, you need a big capacitor and flash bulb.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want a decent flash , and not just some ultra bright LED , you need a big capacitor and flash bulb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want a decent flash, and not just some ultra bright LED, you need a big capacitor and flash bulb.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809427</id>
	<title>Re:Carriers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256058120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In reality, today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS, Web OS, the iPhone OS, and Windows Mobile on their phones. They can't customize the OS. So buying a Blackberry on Verizon is no different from buying a Blackberry on AT&amp;T. Google offers up Android for free, and tells networks that they can even customize the software so AT&amp;T's build of Android is unique, and they reject Android. It makes zero sense.</p></div><p>It makes sense if those same manufacturers just want an OS and not have to diddle with anything.  Its similar to Windows in that way, they just want to install and go, no tinkering that comes back to the manufacturer, but rather being able to point any configuration issues back at the software designer.</p><p>Also, if you want to bring customers over from a competitor, the fact that your crackberry is the same OS as theirs, helps soothe the transition.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In reality , today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS , Web OS , the iPhone OS , and Windows Mobile on their phones .
They ca n't customize the OS .
So buying a Blackberry on Verizon is no different from buying a Blackberry on AT&amp;T .
Google offers up Android for free , and tells networks that they can even customize the software so AT&amp;T 's build of Android is unique , and they reject Android .
It makes zero sense.It makes sense if those same manufacturers just want an OS and not have to diddle with anything .
Its similar to Windows in that way , they just want to install and go , no tinkering that comes back to the manufacturer , but rather being able to point any configuration issues back at the software designer.Also , if you want to bring customers over from a competitor , the fact that your crackberry is the same OS as theirs , helps soothe the transition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In reality, today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS, Web OS, the iPhone OS, and Windows Mobile on their phones.
They can't customize the OS.
So buying a Blackberry on Verizon is no different from buying a Blackberry on AT&amp;T.
Google offers up Android for free, and tells networks that they can even customize the software so AT&amp;T's build of Android is unique, and they reject Android.
It makes zero sense.It makes sense if those same manufacturers just want an OS and not have to diddle with anything.
Its similar to Windows in that way, they just want to install and go, no tinkering that comes back to the manufacturer, but rather being able to point any configuration issues back at the software designer.Also, if you want to bring customers over from a competitor, the fact that your crackberry is the same OS as theirs, helps soothe the transition.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812661</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Random5</author>
	<datestamp>1256069220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You could just (very delicately) drill the lens out and fill it in with epoxy, they might accept that if you cleared the idea with them first. God help you if you try to take it back on warranty though!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You could just ( very delicately ) drill the lens out and fill it in with epoxy , they might accept that if you cleared the idea with them first .
God help you if you try to take it back on warranty though !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could just (very delicately) drill the lens out and fill it in with epoxy, they might accept that if you cleared the idea with them first.
God help you if you try to take it back on warranty though!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809585</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256058600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You're barking up the wrong tree if you want a "very good camera" in a mobile phone, it just can't be done, the optics aren't good enough.</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.trustedreviews.com/mobile-phones/news/2009/09/30/Samsung-Unveils-12MP-Phone-with-Optical-Zoom/p1" title="trustedreviews.com" rel="nofollow">Oh yeah?</a> [trustedreviews.com]</p><p>Granted, it's more like a camera with a phone built in, but still.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're barking up the wrong tree if you want a " very good camera " in a mobile phone , it just ca n't be done , the optics are n't good enough .
Oh yeah ?
[ trustedreviews.com ] Granted , it 's more like a camera with a phone built in , but still .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're barking up the wrong tree if you want a "very good camera" in a mobile phone, it just can't be done, the optics aren't good enough.
Oh yeah?
[trustedreviews.com]Granted, it's more like a camera with a phone built in, but still.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810731</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>oakgrove</author>
	<datestamp>1256062440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know what the problem is or isn't with Symbian but as for Android, I see the variety of handsets and the openness having a very interesting side effect if it is exploited properly by the handset makers.  Think about it.  Android is open source so as opposed to WinMo, for example, where although you can pretty up the interface some, what you're left with underneath is essentially the same thing as what all of your other umpteen competitors have. Contrast this with Android, where you can actually work on the internals of the OS itself to differentiate it from everybody else.  Things like an improved scheduler, apps to SD out of the box, built in Debian bootstrap, root OOTB, the possibilities are practically endless.  Hopefully, the handset makers will use this to one up each other more and more and since it is open source, when the OEM's release their code, upstream can take patches and make vanilla even better.  They are already taking stuff from amateurs like Cyanogen and adding it to the main tree.  I know, I know, citation needed.</p><p>
As far as the detrimental effects of possible balkanization goes, I don't see it.  Manufacturers will be compelled to maintain application compatibility as what good is the phone for many normal users if they can't download cool stuff from Market.  It's kind of akin to a far off post-human future where humans and machines converge, most of us are still going to be physically recognizable as not too far removed from plain old <i>homo sapien sapiens</i> as nobody is going to want to have sex with you if you look like a crock pot.</p><p>
I think we're in for some exciting times.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know what the problem is or is n't with Symbian but as for Android , I see the variety of handsets and the openness having a very interesting side effect if it is exploited properly by the handset makers .
Think about it .
Android is open source so as opposed to WinMo , for example , where although you can pretty up the interface some , what you 're left with underneath is essentially the same thing as what all of your other umpteen competitors have .
Contrast this with Android , where you can actually work on the internals of the OS itself to differentiate it from everybody else .
Things like an improved scheduler , apps to SD out of the box , built in Debian bootstrap , root OOTB , the possibilities are practically endless .
Hopefully , the handset makers will use this to one up each other more and more and since it is open source , when the OEM 's release their code , upstream can take patches and make vanilla even better .
They are already taking stuff from amateurs like Cyanogen and adding it to the main tree .
I know , I know , citation needed .
As far as the detrimental effects of possible balkanization goes , I do n't see it .
Manufacturers will be compelled to maintain application compatibility as what good is the phone for many normal users if they ca n't download cool stuff from Market .
It 's kind of akin to a far off post-human future where humans and machines converge , most of us are still going to be physically recognizable as not too far removed from plain old homo sapien sapiens as nobody is going to want to have sex with you if you look like a crock pot .
I think we 're in for some exciting times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know what the problem is or isn't with Symbian but as for Android, I see the variety of handsets and the openness having a very interesting side effect if it is exploited properly by the handset makers.
Think about it.
Android is open source so as opposed to WinMo, for example, where although you can pretty up the interface some, what you're left with underneath is essentially the same thing as what all of your other umpteen competitors have.
Contrast this with Android, where you can actually work on the internals of the OS itself to differentiate it from everybody else.
Things like an improved scheduler, apps to SD out of the box, built in Debian bootstrap, root OOTB, the possibilities are practically endless.
Hopefully, the handset makers will use this to one up each other more and more and since it is open source, when the OEM's release their code, upstream can take patches and make vanilla even better.
They are already taking stuff from amateurs like Cyanogen and adding it to the main tree.
I know, I know, citation needed.
As far as the detrimental effects of possible balkanization goes, I don't see it.
Manufacturers will be compelled to maintain application compatibility as what good is the phone for many normal users if they can't download cool stuff from Market.
It's kind of akin to a far off post-human future where humans and machines converge, most of us are still going to be physically recognizable as not too far removed from plain old homo sapien sapiens as nobody is going to want to have sex with you if you look like a crock pot.
I think we're in for some exciting times.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811749</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>cheshiremoe</author>
	<datestamp>1256065920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems like there are some decent camera phones on some symbian phones from nokia, samsung and sony ericson.
like this one:
<a href="http://www.sonyericsson.com/cws/products/mobilephones/overview/satio?lc=en&amp;cc=gb" title="sonyericsson.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.sonyericsson.com/cws/products/mobilephones/overview/satio?lc=en&amp;cc=gb</a> [sonyericsson.com]

android does seem to lack some megapixels.  I think that most of the people here are right that the lack of optical zoom makes for shity pictures in most instances accept portrait photos, but for a phone that's all you need to snap a quick picture and post it on flicker or facebook for family and friends. Nobody is printing them out at poster size.  Even my 2MP photos from my 3 year old sony ericson phone are only seen at a quarter of the original size most of the time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems like there are some decent camera phones on some symbian phones from nokia , samsung and sony ericson .
like this one : http : //www.sonyericsson.com/cws/products/mobilephones/overview/satio ? lc = en&amp;cc = gb [ sonyericsson.com ] android does seem to lack some megapixels .
I think that most of the people here are right that the lack of optical zoom makes for shity pictures in most instances accept portrait photos , but for a phone that 's all you need to snap a quick picture and post it on flicker or facebook for family and friends .
Nobody is printing them out at poster size .
Even my 2MP photos from my 3 year old sony ericson phone are only seen at a quarter of the original size most of the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems like there are some decent camera phones on some symbian phones from nokia, samsung and sony ericson.
like this one:
http://www.sonyericsson.com/cws/products/mobilephones/overview/satio?lc=en&amp;cc=gb [sonyericsson.com]

android does seem to lack some megapixels.
I think that most of the people here are right that the lack of optical zoom makes for shity pictures in most instances accept portrait photos, but for a phone that's all you need to snap a quick picture and post it on flicker or facebook for family and friends.
Nobody is printing them out at poster size.
Even my 2MP photos from my 3 year old sony ericson phone are only seen at a quarter of the original size most of the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808349</id>
	<title>Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android</title>
	<author>DeadCatX2</author>
	<datestamp>1256054820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if the free market will help naturally select Android phones with features that are popular among the most users, with possible niche phones serving niche markets (like that fellow up there who doesn't want a camera on his phone)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if the free market will help naturally select Android phones with features that are popular among the most users , with possible niche phones serving niche markets ( like that fellow up there who does n't want a camera on his phone )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if the free market will help naturally select Android phones with features that are popular among the most users, with possible niche phones serving niche markets (like that fellow up there who doesn't want a camera on his phone)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808825</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>FatAlb3rt</author>
	<datestamp>1256056320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in an Android phone</i> <br>
<br>
How many people are interested in a phone because of its OS?  I think features &amp; price are what the vast majority of people will be looking at...</htmltext>
<tokenext>When there 's 51 possible choices for someone who 's interested in an Android phone How many people are interested in a phone because of its OS ?
I think features &amp; price are what the vast majority of people will be looking at.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in an Android phone 

How many people are interested in a phone because of its OS?
I think features &amp; price are what the vast majority of people will be looking at...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809661</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Belial6</author>
	<datestamp>1256058900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The back of my myTouch is replacable.  If someone would just sell a back plate without the camera window, the problem should be solved.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The back of my myTouch is replacable .
If someone would just sell a back plate without the camera window , the problem should be solved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The back of my myTouch is replacable.
If someone would just sell a back plate without the camera window, the problem should be solved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>beelsebob</author>
	<datestamp>1256054400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're barking up the wrong tree if you want a "very good camera" in a mobile phone, it just can't be done, the optics aren't good enough.</p><p>For reference though, an 8MB camera in a phone is likely to be *worse* than a 5MP one, which in turn will be worse than a 3MP one (which is about the optimum).</p><p>More pixels in such a small area == less light falling on the pixels == higher sensitivity pixels == worse signal to noise ratio.</p><p>The result of that is that phones with high resolution cameras have to apply a noise reduction filter, which is essentially just a blur, and none of these cameras can manage a sharp focus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're barking up the wrong tree if you want a " very good camera " in a mobile phone , it just ca n't be done , the optics are n't good enough.For reference though , an 8MB camera in a phone is likely to be * worse * than a 5MP one , which in turn will be worse than a 3MP one ( which is about the optimum ) .More pixels in such a small area = = less light falling on the pixels = = higher sensitivity pixels = = worse signal to noise ratio.The result of that is that phones with high resolution cameras have to apply a noise reduction filter , which is essentially just a blur , and none of these cameras can manage a sharp focus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're barking up the wrong tree if you want a "very good camera" in a mobile phone, it just can't be done, the optics aren't good enough.For reference though, an 8MB camera in a phone is likely to be *worse* than a 5MP one, which in turn will be worse than a 3MP one (which is about the optimum).More pixels in such a small area == less light falling on the pixels == higher sensitivity pixels == worse signal to noise ratio.The result of that is that phones with high resolution cameras have to apply a noise reduction filter, which is essentially just a blur, and none of these cameras can manage a sharp focus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808573</id>
	<title>Re:Too expensive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256055540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When I see any of these, I say to myself $1000/yr. Thats what these things cost, a vacation to Mexico!</p></div><p>Why? An unlocked HTC dream will set you back about $300, and even the latest and greates phones rarely are mre than $600. If you pay for an expensive data plan, then that's what you're paying for.<br>It's the same with the iPhone.<br>If you want to use it as a mobile computer, you can do just that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I see any of these , I say to myself $ 1000/yr .
Thats what these things cost , a vacation to Mexico ! Why ?
An unlocked HTC dream will set you back about $ 300 , and even the latest and greates phones rarely are mre than $ 600 .
If you pay for an expensive data plan , then that 's what you 're paying for.It 's the same with the iPhone.If you want to use it as a mobile computer , you can do just that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I see any of these, I say to myself $1000/yr.
Thats what these things cost, a vacation to Mexico!Why?
An unlocked HTC dream will set you back about $300, and even the latest and greates phones rarely are mre than $600.
If you pay for an expensive data plan, then that's what you're paying for.It's the same with the iPhone.If you want to use it as a mobile computer, you can do just that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979</id>
	<title>Features I want First.</title>
	<author>mrpacmanjel</author>
	<datestamp>1256053440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A decent processor!</p><p>I think the current available phones have a 520mhz processor. The Android software seems to run at an accetptable speed (since the os was updated to 1.5?) but I imagine any apps would be limited by the speed of the processor.<br>I know this will change with newer phones - Acer are develping an android phone with 1ghz processor.</p><p>A camera flash!</p><p>I do not understand why many of the phones contain a 3 or 5 megapixel camera but no flash! Maybe it is related to cost/component size but come on! - this was acceptable with older phones but today I would like to think it is essential.</p><p>A physical keyboard!</p><p>I know this will add bulk to the phone but considering what android's potential can be (with the right hardware) this will make the phone much more versatile. What about a detachable keyboard?</p><p>More memory?<br>The os runs in a java-like virtual machine. If it has any relation to Java does this mean it will exhibit memory consumption similar to Java? I also understand there is an API to bypass the vm and use native code.</p><p>As it stands I will be ordering the Nokia N900 at the end of October and cannot wait for the hardware to improve. Despite the hype I think the N900 will eventualy become a "niche" product.</p><p>On the other hand, the development of Android phones is great and appears it will dominate the mobile phone market. Hopefully it will drive competition and lead to the reduction of iphone obsession.</p><p>Speaking of iphones does the Android phones have a "Big Red Kill" switch too?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A decent processor ! I think the current available phones have a 520mhz processor .
The Android software seems to run at an accetptable speed ( since the os was updated to 1.5 ?
) but I imagine any apps would be limited by the speed of the processor.I know this will change with newer phones - Acer are develping an android phone with 1ghz processor.A camera flash ! I do not understand why many of the phones contain a 3 or 5 megapixel camera but no flash !
Maybe it is related to cost/component size but come on !
- this was acceptable with older phones but today I would like to think it is essential.A physical keyboard ! I know this will add bulk to the phone but considering what android 's potential can be ( with the right hardware ) this will make the phone much more versatile .
What about a detachable keyboard ? More memory ? The os runs in a java-like virtual machine .
If it has any relation to Java does this mean it will exhibit memory consumption similar to Java ?
I also understand there is an API to bypass the vm and use native code.As it stands I will be ordering the Nokia N900 at the end of October and can not wait for the hardware to improve .
Despite the hype I think the N900 will eventualy become a " niche " product.On the other hand , the development of Android phones is great and appears it will dominate the mobile phone market .
Hopefully it will drive competition and lead to the reduction of iphone obsession.Speaking of iphones does the Android phones have a " Big Red Kill " switch too ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A decent processor!I think the current available phones have a 520mhz processor.
The Android software seems to run at an accetptable speed (since the os was updated to 1.5?
) but I imagine any apps would be limited by the speed of the processor.I know this will change with newer phones - Acer are develping an android phone with 1ghz processor.A camera flash!I do not understand why many of the phones contain a 3 or 5 megapixel camera but no flash!
Maybe it is related to cost/component size but come on!
- this was acceptable with older phones but today I would like to think it is essential.A physical keyboard!I know this will add bulk to the phone but considering what android's potential can be (with the right hardware) this will make the phone much more versatile.
What about a detachable keyboard?More memory?The os runs in a java-like virtual machine.
If it has any relation to Java does this mean it will exhibit memory consumption similar to Java?
I also understand there is an API to bypass the vm and use native code.As it stands I will be ordering the Nokia N900 at the end of October and cannot wait for the hardware to improve.
Despite the hype I think the N900 will eventualy become a "niche" product.On the other hand, the development of Android phones is great and appears it will dominate the mobile phone market.
Hopefully it will drive competition and lead to the reduction of iphone obsession.Speaking of iphones does the Android phones have a "Big Red Kill" switch too?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808689</id>
	<title>Re:Features I want First.</title>
	<author>Andy Dodd</author>
	<datestamp>1256055900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A strobe requires:<br>1)  Pulsed energy storage (big photo-grade electrolytic capacitor)<br>2)  Lots of energy per pulse (eats battery - look at how much battery life of cameras drops when the flash is used)</p><p>It's basically impossible to put a strobe into a phone without making it unacceptably large or brutally killing battery life, especially with the general trend in phone design - Thinner/smaller.</p><p>As to physical keyboard - there are lots of QWERTY slider phones out there.  In fact the original G1 was just such a phone (although the sliding mechanism was WEIRD and seemed extremely flimsy to me compared to other HTC sliders).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A strobe requires : 1 ) Pulsed energy storage ( big photo-grade electrolytic capacitor ) 2 ) Lots of energy per pulse ( eats battery - look at how much battery life of cameras drops when the flash is used ) It 's basically impossible to put a strobe into a phone without making it unacceptably large or brutally killing battery life , especially with the general trend in phone design - Thinner/smaller.As to physical keyboard - there are lots of QWERTY slider phones out there .
In fact the original G1 was just such a phone ( although the sliding mechanism was WEIRD and seemed extremely flimsy to me compared to other HTC sliders ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A strobe requires:1)  Pulsed energy storage (big photo-grade electrolytic capacitor)2)  Lots of energy per pulse (eats battery - look at how much battery life of cameras drops when the flash is used)It's basically impossible to put a strobe into a phone without making it unacceptably large or brutally killing battery life, especially with the general trend in phone design - Thinner/smaller.As to physical keyboard - there are lots of QWERTY slider phones out there.
In fact the original G1 was just such a phone (although the sliding mechanism was WEIRD and seemed extremely flimsy to me compared to other HTC sliders).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808939</id>
	<title>freerunner</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256056680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They counted the Koolu Freerunner and Openmoko GTA02 as separate phones, which they're not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They counted the Koolu Freerunner and Openmoko GTA02 as separate phones , which they 're not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They counted the Koolu Freerunner and Openmoko GTA02 as separate phones, which they're not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812161</id>
	<title>Re:Features I want First.</title>
	<author>xant</author>
	<datestamp>1256067360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Speaking of iphones does the Android phones have a "Big Red Kill" switch too?</p><p>Not sure what "Big Red Kill" does, but it's either one of the following two things:</p><p>1) force power off.  Yep, either hold down power for a long time, or take out the battery.  (Whoops, you can't do that with an iphone.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>2) force all wireless radios off.  Yep, hold down power for a couple of seconds until you get a menu, then select "airplane mode".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Speaking of iphones does the Android phones have a " Big Red Kill " switch too ? Not sure what " Big Red Kill " does , but it 's either one of the following two things : 1 ) force power off .
Yep , either hold down power for a long time , or take out the battery .
( Whoops , you ca n't do that with an iphone .
: ) 2 ) force all wireless radios off .
Yep , hold down power for a couple of seconds until you get a menu , then select " airplane mode " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Speaking of iphones does the Android phones have a "Big Red Kill" switch too?Not sure what "Big Red Kill" does, but it's either one of the following two things:1) force power off.
Yep, either hold down power for a long time, or take out the battery.
(Whoops, you can't do that with an iphone.
:)2) force all wireless radios off.
Yep, hold down power for a couple of seconds until you get a menu, then select "airplane mode".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811141</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>raddan</author>
	<datestamp>1256063820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On the other hand, it is precisely this property that makes the web such a success.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , it is precisely this property that makes the web such a success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand, it is precisely this property that makes the web such a success.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808537</id>
	<title>Re:History repeats itself</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1256055420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except when you compare the iphone to other cell phones it's priced in the middle of the pack, not more expensive than everyone else. Most of the price of a cell phone is in the monthly bill. iphone prices range from $50 for a 3G refurb to $299 for a 32GB 3GS which is in line with other cell phones. An iphone will run you $70 a month for the basic plan. Sprint's cheapest plan is $60 and I priced VZW at $85 a month for a cheap plan.</p><p>and unlike the Mac of the 1980's the iphone has the most developer support and recent studies have shown that iphone apps make more money than the same Android app. It's too early for the Pre, but so far it makes more financial sense for a developer to write apps for the iphone rather than for Android. And Apple's recent rule changes will mean less piracy and more money for developers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except when you compare the iphone to other cell phones it 's priced in the middle of the pack , not more expensive than everyone else .
Most of the price of a cell phone is in the monthly bill .
iphone prices range from $ 50 for a 3G refurb to $ 299 for a 32GB 3GS which is in line with other cell phones .
An iphone will run you $ 70 a month for the basic plan .
Sprint 's cheapest plan is $ 60 and I priced VZW at $ 85 a month for a cheap plan.and unlike the Mac of the 1980 's the iphone has the most developer support and recent studies have shown that iphone apps make more money than the same Android app .
It 's too early for the Pre , but so far it makes more financial sense for a developer to write apps for the iphone rather than for Android .
And Apple 's recent rule changes will mean less piracy and more money for developers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except when you compare the iphone to other cell phones it's priced in the middle of the pack, not more expensive than everyone else.
Most of the price of a cell phone is in the monthly bill.
iphone prices range from $50 for a 3G refurb to $299 for a 32GB 3GS which is in line with other cell phones.
An iphone will run you $70 a month for the basic plan.
Sprint's cheapest plan is $60 and I priced VZW at $85 a month for a cheap plan.and unlike the Mac of the 1980's the iphone has the most developer support and recent studies have shown that iphone apps make more money than the same Android app.
It's too early for the Pre, but so far it makes more financial sense for a developer to write apps for the iphone rather than for Android.
And Apple's recent rule changes will mean less piracy and more money for developers</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808077</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807365</id>
	<title>first post expected now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256050920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>suck my cock, faggots!</htmltext>
<tokenext>suck my cock , faggots !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>suck my cock, faggots!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810297</id>
	<title>Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256060940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm using <a href="cyanogenmod.com" title="slashdot.org">CyanogenMod </a> [slashdot.org] on my G1 with all of my apps on a class 6 sdcard and the CPU clocked to 528 MHz.  The phone is blazing fast.  It compares very favorably to an iPhone 3GS.  Like my sibling poster mentioned, there are certain apps that either use a lot of the phones resources like the Weather app and there are other apps that wake the phone up a lot to check things on the net, etc. that will hammer your battery.  Try experimenting with uninstalling some of your apps and you might be surprised on how fast your phone can be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm using CyanogenMod [ slashdot.org ] on my G1 with all of my apps on a class 6 sdcard and the CPU clocked to 528 MHz .
The phone is blazing fast .
It compares very favorably to an iPhone 3GS .
Like my sibling poster mentioned , there are certain apps that either use a lot of the phones resources like the Weather app and there are other apps that wake the phone up a lot to check things on the net , etc .
that will hammer your battery .
Try experimenting with uninstalling some of your apps and you might be surprised on how fast your phone can be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm using CyanogenMod  [slashdot.org] on my G1 with all of my apps on a class 6 sdcard and the CPU clocked to 528 MHz.
The phone is blazing fast.
It compares very favorably to an iPhone 3GS.
Like my sibling poster mentioned, there are certain apps that either use a lot of the phones resources like the Weather app and there are other apps that wake the phone up a lot to check things on the net, etc.
that will hammer your battery.
Try experimenting with uninstalling some of your apps and you might be surprised on how fast your phone can be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811687</id>
	<title>Re:Just 50?</title>
	<author>Xtifr</author>
	<datestamp>1256065800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, and nothing says quality like market share.  That's why Windows is widely acknowledged (especially around here) to be the best OS ever, and McDonald's to be the greatest cuisine of all time.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , and nothing says quality like market share .
That 's why Windows is widely acknowledged ( especially around here ) to be the best OS ever , and McDonald 's to be the greatest cuisine of all time .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, and nothing says quality like market share.
That's why Windows is widely acknowledged (especially around here) to be the best OS ever, and McDonald's to be the greatest cuisine of all time.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807447</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>japhering</author>
	<datestamp>1256051940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who frequently has to be in secured areas.. I hope at least some of the models never, ever have a camera, as is it a pain to either have to lock my phone in the car or to hand it over to some $10 an hour security guard prior to entry or have it confiscated by the same guard on the way out if I forget to hand it to him on the way in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who frequently has to be in secured areas.. I hope at least some of the models never , ever have a camera , as is it a pain to either have to lock my phone in the car or to hand it over to some $ 10 an hour security guard prior to entry or have it confiscated by the same guard on the way out if I forget to hand it to him on the way in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who frequently has to be in secured areas.. I hope at least some of the models never, ever have a camera, as is it a pain to either have to lock my phone in the car or to hand it over to some $10 an hour security guard prior to entry or have it confiscated by the same guard on the way out if I forget to hand it to him on the way in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803</id>
	<title>Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256052600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Regarding speed, you will find Android on the slow side as well, especially if you let your SMS app become bogged down with hundreds of old messages (to show previous chat log), and when your calendar and phone book get lots of entries. I'm not saying it takes *several* seconds, but it's a damn cry from being instantaneous.</p><p>Regarding battery life, expect one full working day, or two whole days TOPS, from *any* modern device.</p><p>If you want fortnight-long battery life, grab a Psion Series5 MX Pro and have it refurbished (yes, I'm being serious). If you want instant application starts, grab either that or a Palm Treo and have that refurbished. For *phone* capability, forget the Psion, that's "just" a pda (in quotes because it's a damn proper one).</p><p>Do NOT expect an Android device to be a pda. It's a smartphone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Regarding speed , you will find Android on the slow side as well , especially if you let your SMS app become bogged down with hundreds of old messages ( to show previous chat log ) , and when your calendar and phone book get lots of entries .
I 'm not saying it takes * several * seconds , but it 's a damn cry from being instantaneous.Regarding battery life , expect one full working day , or two whole days TOPS , from * any * modern device.If you want fortnight-long battery life , grab a Psion Series5 MX Pro and have it refurbished ( yes , I 'm being serious ) .
If you want instant application starts , grab either that or a Palm Treo and have that refurbished .
For * phone * capability , forget the Psion , that 's " just " a pda ( in quotes because it 's a damn proper one ) .Do NOT expect an Android device to be a pda .
It 's a smartphone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Regarding speed, you will find Android on the slow side as well, especially if you let your SMS app become bogged down with hundreds of old messages (to show previous chat log), and when your calendar and phone book get lots of entries.
I'm not saying it takes *several* seconds, but it's a damn cry from being instantaneous.Regarding battery life, expect one full working day, or two whole days TOPS, from *any* modern device.If you want fortnight-long battery life, grab a Psion Series5 MX Pro and have it refurbished (yes, I'm being serious).
If you want instant application starts, grab either that or a Palm Treo and have that refurbished.
For *phone* capability, forget the Psion, that's "just" a pda (in quotes because it's a damn proper one).Do NOT expect an Android device to be a pda.
It's a smartphone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809743</id>
	<title>50?</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1256059200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd think that it would take more than 50 phones to get very big in the cell phone business. I'm sure that apple sells more than 50 phones per day. These must be very expensive units to recoup the development costs with that few being sold.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd think that it would take more than 50 phones to get very big in the cell phone business .
I 'm sure that apple sells more than 50 phones per day .
These must be very expensive units to recoup the development costs with that few being sold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd think that it would take more than 50 phones to get very big in the cell phone business.
I'm sure that apple sells more than 50 phones per day.
These must be very expensive units to recoup the development costs with that few being sold.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808763</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>jhfry</author>
	<datestamp>1256056140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, Android will never have #1, because it free.</p><p>I know what your trying to say, but I have to disagree.  I fully expect to see an Android phone take #1 in the future.  Why?  Because once these 50+ phones are out, and the 100's that follow, there will be far more users of Android phones than phones running the Mac or RIM OS.</p><p>At some point, the public will consider Android phones to be equal to the iPhone in features and capability, but they will have choice (Querty keyboard, carrier, camera, form factor, size, screen, cost, etc.).  To many people that freedom, coupled with the features and usability they want, is more than enough to keep them away from iPhone.</p><p>For Android to compete with RIM, it needs to get serious about business.  The good news is, that because Android is open source, and most contributors have real jobs, its capabilities in business will quickly surpass the Blackberry.  Honestly, I have been with several companies that standardized on Blackberry, and other than mail and policy managment, the phone is a waste.  If Android 2.0 gets the mail part right, RIM should be worried.  If they introduce a policy management server... then RIM is in trouble.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , Android will never have # 1 , because it free.I know what your trying to say , but I have to disagree .
I fully expect to see an Android phone take # 1 in the future .
Why ? Because once these 50 + phones are out , and the 100 's that follow , there will be far more users of Android phones than phones running the Mac or RIM OS.At some point , the public will consider Android phones to be equal to the iPhone in features and capability , but they will have choice ( Querty keyboard , carrier , camera , form factor , size , screen , cost , etc. ) .
To many people that freedom , coupled with the features and usability they want , is more than enough to keep them away from iPhone.For Android to compete with RIM , it needs to get serious about business .
The good news is , that because Android is open source , and most contributors have real jobs , its capabilities in business will quickly surpass the Blackberry .
Honestly , I have been with several companies that standardized on Blackberry , and other than mail and policy managment , the phone is a waste .
If Android 2.0 gets the mail part right , RIM should be worried .
If they introduce a policy management server... then RIM is in trouble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, Android will never have #1, because it free.I know what your trying to say, but I have to disagree.
I fully expect to see an Android phone take #1 in the future.
Why?  Because once these 50+ phones are out, and the 100's that follow, there will be far more users of Android phones than phones running the Mac or RIM OS.At some point, the public will consider Android phones to be equal to the iPhone in features and capability, but they will have choice (Querty keyboard, carrier, camera, form factor, size, screen, cost, etc.).
To many people that freedom, coupled with the features and usability they want, is more than enough to keep them away from iPhone.For Android to compete with RIM, it needs to get serious about business.
The good news is, that because Android is open source, and most contributors have real jobs, its capabilities in business will quickly surpass the Blackberry.
Honestly, I have been with several companies that standardized on Blackberry, and other than mail and policy managment, the phone is a waste.
If Android 2.0 gets the mail part right, RIM should be worried.
If they introduce a policy management server... then RIM is in trouble.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813905</id>
	<title>Re:History repeats itself</title>
	<author>dingen</author>
	<datestamp>1256031120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war</p></div><p>Every time you touch a mouse to move the cursor on your color graphics screen and click on a window, menu or icon, you are using a computer the way Steve Jobs wants you to. Think about that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly how Apple lost the PC warEvery time you touch a mouse to move the cursor on your color graphics screen and click on a window , menu or icon , you are using a computer the way Steve Jobs wants you to .
Think about that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is exactly how Apple lost the PC warEvery time you touch a mouse to move the cursor on your color graphics screen and click on a window, menu or icon, you are using a computer the way Steve Jobs wants you to.
Think about that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808077</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807827</id>
	<title>Re:Too expensive</title>
	<author>bigstrat2003</author>
	<datestamp>1256052660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>With a contract, you can get the HTC Magic from T-Mobile for $150. That's not quite your asking price of $100, but it's not exactly $1000 either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>With a contract , you can get the HTC Magic from T-Mobile for $ 150 .
That 's not quite your asking price of $ 100 , but it 's not exactly $ 1000 either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With a contract, you can get the HTC Magic from T-Mobile for $150.
That's not quite your asking price of $100, but it's not exactly $1000 either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818305</id>
	<title>Google releasing their own Android smartphone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256052000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google is jumping into the smartphone market with an Android phone of its own

<a href="http://slashdot.org/submission/1096923/Google-releasing-their-own-Android-smartphone" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://slashdot.org/submission/1096923/Google-releasing-their-own-Android-smartphone</a> [slashdot.org]

Its really incredible!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google is jumping into the smartphone market with an Android phone of its own http : //slashdot.org/submission/1096923/Google-releasing-their-own-Android-smartphone [ slashdot.org ] Its really incredible !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google is jumping into the smartphone market with an Android phone of its own

http://slashdot.org/submission/1096923/Google-releasing-their-own-Android-smartphone [slashdot.org]

Its really incredible!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808469</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Andy Dodd</author>
	<datestamp>1256055180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My site eventually changed policy to allow employees to carry cameraphones if they took appropriate training, which was basically, "Don't use the camera on site."</p><p>There are areas we can't even bring cameraphones, but we're not even allowed to bring non-camera phones into those areas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My site eventually changed policy to allow employees to carry cameraphones if they took appropriate training , which was basically , " Do n't use the camera on site .
" There are areas we ca n't even bring cameraphones , but we 're not even allowed to bring non-camera phones into those areas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My site eventually changed policy to allow employees to carry cameraphones if they took appropriate training, which was basically, "Don't use the camera on site.
"There are areas we can't even bring cameraphones, but we're not even allowed to bring non-camera phones into those areas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809063</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>Zebedeu</author>
	<datestamp>1256057100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The new Android SDK attempts to solve this problem by allowing developers to specify screen size profiles. Check out the <a href="http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2009/10/support-for-additional-screen.html" title="blogspot.com">blog post</a> [blogspot.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The new Android SDK attempts to solve this problem by allowing developers to specify screen size profiles .
Check out the blog post [ blogspot.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new Android SDK attempts to solve this problem by allowing developers to specify screen size profiles.
Check out the blog post [blogspot.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807927</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>keatonguy</author>
	<datestamp>1256053140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right, you're precisely right, and for this reason Android will probably never have the kind of ubiquity in the consumer mind that the word iPhone has. What's really important is that the OSS community, particularly the Linux dev community, rally around Android too. Like with any OSS endeavor, if you don't have a community of volunteers helping to make the software better, it'll just fade into obscurity and obsolescence.</p><p>But if the community jumps on it and starts building the apps we want to see for it? Then we'll have our OSS superphone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , you 're precisely right , and for this reason Android will probably never have the kind of ubiquity in the consumer mind that the word iPhone has .
What 's really important is that the OSS community , particularly the Linux dev community , rally around Android too .
Like with any OSS endeavor , if you do n't have a community of volunteers helping to make the software better , it 'll just fade into obscurity and obsolescence.But if the community jumps on it and starts building the apps we want to see for it ?
Then we 'll have our OSS superphone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, you're precisely right, and for this reason Android will probably never have the kind of ubiquity in the consumer mind that the word iPhone has.
What's really important is that the OSS community, particularly the Linux dev community, rally around Android too.
Like with any OSS endeavor, if you don't have a community of volunteers helping to make the software better, it'll just fade into obscurity and obsolescence.But if the community jumps on it and starts building the apps we want to see for it?
Then we'll have our OSS superphone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809087</id>
	<title>Re:Too expensive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256057160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After everything (minus a slight corporate discount) my G1 plan costs $55/mo, $660/yr. I got the phone used for ~$180. Drop the data plan, stick to wifi<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... $30/mo $360/yr. The only way to break a grand is to buy a dev phone, which you don't actually need if you're just developing apps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After everything ( minus a slight corporate discount ) my G1 plan costs $ 55/mo , $ 660/yr .
I got the phone used for ~ $ 180 .
Drop the data plan , stick to wifi ... $ 30/mo $ 360/yr .
The only way to break a grand is to buy a dev phone , which you do n't actually need if you 're just developing apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After everything (minus a slight corporate discount) my G1 plan costs $55/mo, $660/yr.
I got the phone used for ~$180.
Drop the data plan, stick to wifi ... $30/mo $360/yr.
The only way to break a grand is to buy a dev phone, which you don't actually need if you're just developing apps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808701</id>
	<title>50+ phones and still no proper package management</title>
	<author>BigJim.fr</author>
	<datestamp>1256055960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Package upgrade on Android... For starters, the "My Downloads" list is not ordered alphabetically nor in any apparently meaningful order. Then for each upgradeable package, one must first browse to the package, then manually trigger the upgrade package, then acknowledge system privileges the upgraded package and finally clear the download notification and the update notification. Is this a joke ? This almost matches the tediousness of upgrading Windows software - an impressive feat considering that the foundations of Android package management seem serious enough. Where is my APT ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Package upgrade on Android... For starters , the " My Downloads " list is not ordered alphabetically nor in any apparently meaningful order .
Then for each upgradeable package , one must first browse to the package , then manually trigger the upgrade package , then acknowledge system privileges the upgraded package and finally clear the download notification and the update notification .
Is this a joke ?
This almost matches the tediousness of upgrading Windows software - an impressive feat considering that the foundations of Android package management seem serious enough .
Where is my APT ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Package upgrade on Android... For starters, the "My Downloads" list is not ordered alphabetically nor in any apparently meaningful order.
Then for each upgradeable package, one must first browse to the package, then manually trigger the upgrade package, then acknowledge system privileges the upgraded package and finally clear the download notification and the update notification.
Is this a joke ?
This almost matches the tediousness of upgrading Windows software - an impressive feat considering that the foundations of Android package management seem serious enough.
Where is my APT ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807913</id>
	<title>Is this necessarily a good thing?</title>
	<author>nweaver</author>
	<datestamp>1256053080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The question: Is Android trying to dethrone Symbian or Apple?</p><p>If the goal is Symbian, this is a good thing: An OS thats customed by the handset deliverer with development being secondary, because the platform ends up grossly fragmented (different screens, capabilities, processing power, UI presentation, storage, etc...)</p><p>If the goal is Apple, this is a horrid thing:  Apple's huge lock is the ecosystem, with all the developers.  Which would you rather develop for, a platform which has everything being the same capability, or one with a grossly fragmented market where screens, UI conventions, etc are all different?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The question : Is Android trying to dethrone Symbian or Apple ? If the goal is Symbian , this is a good thing : An OS thats customed by the handset deliverer with development being secondary , because the platform ends up grossly fragmented ( different screens , capabilities , processing power , UI presentation , storage , etc... ) If the goal is Apple , this is a horrid thing : Apple 's huge lock is the ecosystem , with all the developers .
Which would you rather develop for , a platform which has everything being the same capability , or one with a grossly fragmented market where screens , UI conventions , etc are all different ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The question: Is Android trying to dethrone Symbian or Apple?If the goal is Symbian, this is a good thing: An OS thats customed by the handset deliverer with development being secondary, because the platform ends up grossly fragmented (different screens, capabilities, processing power, UI presentation, storage, etc...)If the goal is Apple, this is a horrid thing:  Apple's huge lock is the ecosystem, with all the developers.
Which would you rather develop for, a platform which has everything being the same capability, or one with a grossly fragmented market where screens, UI conventions, etc are all different?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810439</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>cawpin</author>
	<datestamp>1256061360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's one of the things that excites me the most about the Droid. I have a Samsung Omnia running WM6.1 and the 5 MP camera is pretty decent. It's one of the things I was worried about losing whenever Verizon finally got Android. With the MotoDroid, I no longer have to worry about that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's one of the things that excites me the most about the Droid .
I have a Samsung Omnia running WM6.1 and the 5 MP camera is pretty decent .
It 's one of the things I was worried about losing whenever Verizon finally got Android .
With the MotoDroid , I no longer have to worry about that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's one of the things that excites me the most about the Droid.
I have a Samsung Omnia running WM6.1 and the 5 MP camera is pretty decent.
It's one of the things I was worried about losing whenever Verizon finally got Android.
With the MotoDroid, I no longer have to worry about that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807625</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808171</id>
	<title>N900:iPhone:WinMo::Linux:OSX:Windows</title>
	<author>Microlith</author>
	<datestamp>1256054100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry, that slot is reserved for Maemo. Until the community has real influence on the path Android takes, it's not nearly as open.</p><p>It's sad that the N900 doesn't get as much attention as all the Android based phones, what with it being considerably more open and based on existing open frameworks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry , that slot is reserved for Maemo .
Until the community has real influence on the path Android takes , it 's not nearly as open.It 's sad that the N900 does n't get as much attention as all the Android based phones , what with it being considerably more open and based on existing open frameworks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry, that slot is reserved for Maemo.
Until the community has real influence on the path Android takes, it's not nearly as open.It's sad that the N900 doesn't get as much attention as all the Android based phones, what with it being considerably more open and based on existing open frameworks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29825853</id>
	<title>Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256150820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a palm treo 755p and can get 4 days out of the battery.  The only way I get this though is to keep it disconnected from the internet.  What I do now is connect only when I need to (which is almost never) and disconnect when I'm done.  I regularly go 2 days without using more than half the battery.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a palm treo 755p and can get 4 days out of the battery .
The only way I get this though is to keep it disconnected from the internet .
What I do now is connect only when I need to ( which is almost never ) and disconnect when I 'm done .
I regularly go 2 days without using more than half the battery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a palm treo 755p and can get 4 days out of the battery.
The only way I get this though is to keep it disconnected from the internet.
What I do now is connect only when I need to (which is almost never) and disconnect when I'm done.
I regularly go 2 days without using more than half the battery.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811819</id>
	<title>Re:Droid ad didn't make complete sense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256066160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I figured it was an ad for the next iphone and iignoredit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I figured it was an ad for the next iphone and iignoredit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I figured it was an ad for the next iphone and iignoredit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29822503</id>
	<title>Re:Features I want First.</title>
	<author>Conroy</author>
	<datestamp>1256135340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Before you do that, you might want to check out the verizon droid<p><div class="quote"><p>A decent processor!</p><p>I think the current available phones have a 520mhz processor. The Android software seems to run at an accetptable speed (since the os was updated to 1.5?) but I imagine any apps would be limited by the speed of the processor.</p></div><p>droid should have a 600Mhz ARM Cortex A8 processor and dedicated GPU</p><p><div class="quote"><p>A camera flash!</p><p>I do not understand why many of the phones contain a 3 or 5 megapixel camera but no flash!</p></div><p>droid has a 5mp camera with flash, and they claim to have a "low lightcapable camera", although i'm skeptical about that one.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>A physical keyboard!</p><p>I know this will add bulk to the phone</p></div><p>and a slide-out keyboard in a phone 2mm thicker than the iphone</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Before you do that , you might want to check out the verizon droidA decent processor ! I think the current available phones have a 520mhz processor .
The Android software seems to run at an accetptable speed ( since the os was updated to 1.5 ?
) but I imagine any apps would be limited by the speed of the processor.droid should have a 600Mhz ARM Cortex A8 processor and dedicated GPUA camera flash ! I do not understand why many of the phones contain a 3 or 5 megapixel camera but no flash ! droid has a 5mp camera with flash , and they claim to have a " low lightcapable camera " , although i 'm skeptical about that one.A physical keyboard ! I know this will add bulk to the phoneand a slide-out keyboard in a phone 2mm thicker than the iphone</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before you do that, you might want to check out the verizon droidA decent processor!I think the current available phones have a 520mhz processor.
The Android software seems to run at an accetptable speed (since the os was updated to 1.5?
) but I imagine any apps would be limited by the speed of the processor.droid should have a 600Mhz ARM Cortex A8 processor and dedicated GPUA camera flash!I do not understand why many of the phones contain a 3 or 5 megapixel camera but no flash!droid has a 5mp camera with flash, and they claim to have a "low lightcapable camera", although i'm skeptical about that one.A physical keyboard!I know this will add bulk to the phoneand a slide-out keyboard in a phone 2mm thicker than the iphone
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29815605</id>
	<title>Any non phone, wifi type netpads with android?</title>
	<author>guidryp</author>
	<datestamp>1256037540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know something like the iPod touch, but with android?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know something like the iPod touch , but with android ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know something like the iPod touch, but with android?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808907</id>
	<title>Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android</title>
	<author>TheGreatOrangePeel</author>
	<datestamp>1256056560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions of Linux on the shelf!</p></div></blockquote><p>But, that *is* how it's like. There really are 50+ distributions of Linux out there. <a href="http://distrowatch.com/" title="distrowatch.com" rel="nofollow">DistroWatch</a> [distrowatch.com] is proof enough of that.</p><p>I have to say that I feel like you've got it a little bit backwards. It's more like the 50+ *brands* of PCs out there running Windows. That's to say many different brands of hardware, but they're all running the same OS. Granted they've all got their own tweaks and slight differences depending on how the manufacturer configures the software, but anyone used to using Windows on a Dell isn't going to have much trouble using Windows on an HP. This is more or less what Android is doing for the handheld market. Folks that have gotten used to the G1 are going to feel well enough at home on a Samsung Moment or HTC Hero.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50 + different distributions of Linux on the shelf ! But , that * is * how it 's like .
There really are 50 + distributions of Linux out there .
DistroWatch [ distrowatch.com ] is proof enough of that.I have to say that I feel like you 've got it a little bit backwards .
It 's more like the 50 + * brands * of PCs out there running Windows .
That 's to say many different brands of hardware , but they 're all running the same OS .
Granted they 've all got their own tweaks and slight differences depending on how the manufacturer configures the software , but anyone used to using Windows on a Dell is n't going to have much trouble using Windows on an HP .
This is more or less what Android is doing for the handheld market .
Folks that have gotten used to the G1 are going to feel well enough at home on a Samsung Moment or HTC Hero .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions of Linux on the shelf!But, that *is* how it's like.
There really are 50+ distributions of Linux out there.
DistroWatch [distrowatch.com] is proof enough of that.I have to say that I feel like you've got it a little bit backwards.
It's more like the 50+ *brands* of PCs out there running Windows.
That's to say many different brands of hardware, but they're all running the same OS.
Granted they've all got their own tweaks and slight differences depending on how the manufacturer configures the software, but anyone used to using Windows on a Dell isn't going to have much trouble using Windows on an HP.
This is more or less what Android is doing for the handheld market.
Folks that have gotten used to the G1 are going to feel well enough at home on a Samsung Moment or HTC Hero.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807855</id>
	<title>Re:Diversity of features</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1256052780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>that is really too bad, i like keyboards.</p></div></blockquote><p>[Marketing-exec]No, I'm sure you're just confused. Yes, you're familiar with keyboards. Yes, the tactile feedback can be exceedingly useful. Yes, it means you're not hiding what you're about to click on. Yes, it means your screen doesn't get greasy. But what you <i>really</i> want is a touch-screen. It's what we're designing our phones with, because "customers" want it, and you're a customer so you must want it.[/Marketing-exec]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>that is really too bad , i like keyboards .
[ Marketing-exec ] No , I 'm sure you 're just confused .
Yes , you 're familiar with keyboards .
Yes , the tactile feedback can be exceedingly useful .
Yes , it means you 're not hiding what you 're about to click on .
Yes , it means your screen does n't get greasy .
But what you really want is a touch-screen .
It 's what we 're designing our phones with , because " customers " want it , and you 're a customer so you must want it .
[ /Marketing-exec ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that is really too bad, i like keyboards.
[Marketing-exec]No, I'm sure you're just confused.
Yes, you're familiar with keyboards.
Yes, the tactile feedback can be exceedingly useful.
Yes, it means you're not hiding what you're about to click on.
Yes, it means your screen doesn't get greasy.
But what you really want is a touch-screen.
It's what we're designing our phones with, because "customers" want it, and you're a customer so you must want it.
[/Marketing-exec]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807481</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809011</id>
	<title>Re:Is this necessarily a good thing?</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256056860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Both, in the sense that it's going to compete with both, and neither, in the sense that Google presumably has no interest in beating them just to adopt the approaches that it has defeated. It'd be like dethroning the king by engineering a kind of feroceous rabbit that only eats people who act in a really kingly way. When they eat the existing king, you don't declare yourself king and act in a kingly way. You'll get eaten. Declare yourself an arch-duke or something. Even if you have nothing against kings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Both , in the sense that it 's going to compete with both , and neither , in the sense that Google presumably has no interest in beating them just to adopt the approaches that it has defeated .
It 'd be like dethroning the king by engineering a kind of feroceous rabbit that only eats people who act in a really kingly way .
When they eat the existing king , you do n't declare yourself king and act in a kingly way .
You 'll get eaten .
Declare yourself an arch-duke or something .
Even if you have nothing against kings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Both, in the sense that it's going to compete with both, and neither, in the sense that Google presumably has no interest in beating them just to adopt the approaches that it has defeated.
It'd be like dethroning the king by engineering a kind of feroceous rabbit that only eats people who act in a really kingly way.
When they eat the existing king, you don't declare yourself king and act in a kingly way.
You'll get eaten.
Declare yourself an arch-duke or something.
Even if you have nothing against kings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808667</id>
	<title>Really??</title>
	<author>Anyd</author>
	<datestamp>1256055840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>My G1 lasts for like 3 days idling...  I keep GPS/Wifi/Bluetooth turned off unless I need them, but toggling them is easy with the new update (add widget &gt; power control.)  GPS sucks up the battery really fast though, are you keeping that off as well?</htmltext>
<tokenext>My G1 lasts for like 3 days idling... I keep GPS/Wifi/Bluetooth turned off unless I need them , but toggling them is easy with the new update ( add widget &gt; power control .
) GPS sucks up the battery really fast though , are you keeping that off as well ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My G1 lasts for like 3 days idling...  I keep GPS/Wifi/Bluetooth turned off unless I need them, but toggling them is easy with the new update (add widget &gt; power control.
)  GPS sucks up the battery really fast though, are you keeping that off as well?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689</id>
	<title>Top Spot</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1256052240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To me, this is why an Android phone will never take the #1 sales slot. Android, <b>as a platform</b> may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst Android phones, will prevent an individual phone from taking a dominant position. When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in an Android phone, it will result in diluted sales for all 51 phones. That's not to say that some of the better phones won't enjoy strong sales - I'm sure several will - but it is to say that I don't believe they'll compete, on an individual basis, with Blackberry's best sellers nor the iPhone. This, of course, is regardless of the quality of the phones - it's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome...</htmltext>
<tokenext>To me , this is why an Android phone will never take the # 1 sales slot .
Android , as a platform may quickly rise in dominance , but the competition , just amongst Android phones , will prevent an individual phone from taking a dominant position .
When there 's 51 possible choices for someone who 's interested in an Android phone , it will result in diluted sales for all 51 phones .
That 's not to say that some of the better phones wo n't enjoy strong sales - I 'm sure several will - but it is to say that I do n't believe they 'll compete , on an individual basis , with Blackberry 's best sellers nor the iPhone .
This , of course , is regardless of the quality of the phones - it 's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To me, this is why an Android phone will never take the #1 sales slot.
Android, as a platform may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst Android phones, will prevent an individual phone from taking a dominant position.
When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in an Android phone, it will result in diluted sales for all 51 phones.
That's not to say that some of the better phones won't enjoy strong sales - I'm sure several will - but it is to say that I don't believe they'll compete, on an individual basis, with Blackberry's best sellers nor the iPhone.
This, of course, is regardless of the quality of the phones - it's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810265</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Optic7</author>
	<datestamp>1256060820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The photographer counts for a lot too, and sometimes a mobile phone camera is the only thing you have handy. Check out photo 7 of 8 in this list: <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in\_pictures/8314105.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in\_pictures/8314105.stm</a> [bbc.co.uk]</p><p>It's the winner of the landscape photo of the year (UK only?) in the Mobile category.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The photographer counts for a lot too , and sometimes a mobile phone camera is the only thing you have handy .
Check out photo 7 of 8 in this list : http : //news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in \ _pictures/8314105.stm [ bbc.co.uk ] It 's the winner of the landscape photo of the year ( UK only ?
) in the Mobile category .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The photographer counts for a lot too, and sometimes a mobile phone camera is the only thing you have handy.
Check out photo 7 of 8 in this list: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in\_pictures/8314105.stm [bbc.co.uk]It's the winner of the landscape photo of the year (UK only?
) in the Mobile category.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807481</id>
	<title>Diversity of features</title>
	<author>YouWantFriesWithThat</author>
	<datestamp>1256051400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>there is not enough information released as of yet, but i really hope for a greater diversity of features and hardware.  i really want a better (sturdier) piece of hardware than the G1 that has a keyboard and an SD slot. (or 2!)
<br> <br>
i googled the ones on the list that were bold (which apparently indicates they are currently for sale) and i didn't see any that had a keyboard.  they all appeared superficially similar in design: touchscreen iphone lookalikes.  that is really too bad, i like keyboards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>there is not enough information released as of yet , but i really hope for a greater diversity of features and hardware .
i really want a better ( sturdier ) piece of hardware than the G1 that has a keyboard and an SD slot .
( or 2 !
) i googled the ones on the list that were bold ( which apparently indicates they are currently for sale ) and i did n't see any that had a keyboard .
they all appeared superficially similar in design : touchscreen iphone lookalikes .
that is really too bad , i like keyboards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there is not enough information released as of yet, but i really hope for a greater diversity of features and hardware.
i really want a better (sturdier) piece of hardware than the G1 that has a keyboard and an SD slot.
(or 2!
)
 
i googled the ones on the list that were bold (which apparently indicates they are currently for sale) and i didn't see any that had a keyboard.
they all appeared superficially similar in design: touchscreen iphone lookalikes.
that is really too bad, i like keyboards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808335</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more headaches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256054760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is exactly why developers (like myself) love developing for the iPhone. Imagine trying to create an app/game and having to test it for all these devices. It's not just a matter of testing though, each one could have different means of input and different screen sizes. Absolute nightmare.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly why developers ( like myself ) love developing for the iPhone .
Imagine trying to create an app/game and having to test it for all these devices .
It 's not just a matter of testing though , each one could have different means of input and different screen sizes .
Absolute nightmare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is exactly why developers (like myself) love developing for the iPhone.
Imagine trying to create an app/game and having to test it for all these devices.
It's not just a matter of testing though, each one could have different means of input and different screen sizes.
Absolute nightmare.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809817</id>
	<title>Re:Droid ad didn't make complete sense</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256059500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) A "widget" is like a "gadget", those things you can shove on your Mac dashboard or Windows desktop. It's a mini-app which runs in the background that you use often. Samsung pushed them into the mobile space with Touchwiz on their inexplicably successful Tocco and everyone's pissing themselves trying to shove widgets on their phones now.<br>2) That part probably doesn't work. "There's an app for that" tends to trump "there are some SDK restrictions which we don't like"<br>3) Yeah, having your USP visible is a big boon. Nokia is in the midst of an epic fail on Ovi services which you just don't see when you walk into the shop to discuss the phone. With Apple it's "here's apps" with its menu design and Samsung's all "this phone looks a hell of a lot like a camera, hmm?" but many manufacturers don't understand the importance that visibility.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) A " widget " is like a " gadget " , those things you can shove on your Mac dashboard or Windows desktop .
It 's a mini-app which runs in the background that you use often .
Samsung pushed them into the mobile space with Touchwiz on their inexplicably successful Tocco and everyone 's pissing themselves trying to shove widgets on their phones now.2 ) That part probably does n't work .
" There 's an app for that " tends to trump " there are some SDK restrictions which we do n't like " 3 ) Yeah , having your USP visible is a big boon .
Nokia is in the midst of an epic fail on Ovi services which you just do n't see when you walk into the shop to discuss the phone .
With Apple it 's " here 's apps " with its menu design and Samsung 's all " this phone looks a hell of a lot like a camera , hmm ?
" but many manufacturers do n't understand the importance that visibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) A "widget" is like a "gadget", those things you can shove on your Mac dashboard or Windows desktop.
It's a mini-app which runs in the background that you use often.
Samsung pushed them into the mobile space with Touchwiz on their inexplicably successful Tocco and everyone's pissing themselves trying to shove widgets on their phones now.2) That part probably doesn't work.
"There's an app for that" tends to trump "there are some SDK restrictions which we don't like"3) Yeah, having your USP visible is a big boon.
Nokia is in the midst of an epic fail on Ovi services which you just don't see when you walk into the shop to discuss the phone.
With Apple it's "here's apps" with its menu design and Samsung's all "this phone looks a hell of a lot like a camera, hmm?
" but many manufacturers don't understand the importance that visibility.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820973</id>
	<title>Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android</title>
	<author>cboslin</author>
	<datestamp>1256122440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is called "choice" and encourages manufacturers to observe market requirements(e.g. listen to customer) and hopefully drive down prices(unlikely). Whoever get closest to this wins.</p></div><p>Most of the businesses related to wireline/wireless are simply big to care and/or listen to their customers.  And the market does NOT work because of all the proprietary hardware and proprietary software and proprietary networks, etc....

</p><p>If the market was free and working as you, and many others hypothesis; than we would have fiber to our homes already.  (<i>Promised by telcos in 1990s in order to get tax dollars</i>)

</p><p>By 2000 we would have had 100Mbps / 100Mbps Internet access, for less than $55 per month, via that fiber connection to our homes.

</p><p>By 2006 we would have had 1 Gbps / 1 Gbps Internet access for less than $52 per month via that same fiber connection.

</p><p>The market has not and does not work.  The companies that play in the space DO NOT listen to customers as <a href="http://www.ripoffreport.com/" title="ripoffreport.com" rel="nofollow">RipOffReports.com proves</a> [ripoffreport.com]. Enter the name of your provider and search on any term: fraud, problem, billing, and you will discover that your provider and all the other providers have hundreds if not thousands of reports.  One or two you might dismiss as crack pots, but not the volume that is there.  Also it is pretty obvious when you are reading a report if the person is being unreasonable or not.  Sadly most are not, the customers are just not interested in providing service anymore.

</p><p>If they listened to their customers, no one would get an inflated bill in the mail for any reason.  Especially not for the company putting random charges on it.  I personally experienced that from two different providers over a 10 year period before I left cellular forever.

</p><p>I do not mind paying for what I use, but I will not pay for their mistakes or other peoples charges.  Both times I had in excess of three years as a good customer with the provider (<i>obviously one time was longer than just 3 years</i>).  If I had mattered as a customer, they would have removed the charges that I did not make and proved based on my multi-year calling pattern the first time and via their provisioning mistake the second time.  Both times, both companies simply DID NOT CARE. Said pay up or else.  Sorry but mob style tactics do not work on honest Americans.

</p><p>I churned and am much happier for it.  Skype is wonderful and if they went out or got bought out tomorrow, I would provision my own VoIP server (Linux of course), use it myself and sell to my friends.  There is no way I would ever settle for a total cost of ownership of over $100 per year ever again.  Especially not in this economy.

</p><p>These customer-no-service-tactics are really stupid.  They honestly believe you do not have a choice or they would not do it.  Guess what, they are WRONG!

</p><p>Sign me laughing all the way to the bank!

</p><p>P.S. Only Greenlight in Wilson N.C. offers 100Mbps / 100Mbps Fiber connected to your home Internet access in the USA today. It will cost you $100 per month.  When they started offering service, after being invited into the community by the local politicians to do so; the telcos / Cable companies responded by attempting to push legislature through the North Carolina legislature to stop them.  Yea, thats a FREE market, NOT!

</p><p>The markets have not been working since 1990.  So wake up and see the reality of the situation, please, before it is too late.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is called " choice " and encourages manufacturers to observe market requirements ( e.g .
listen to customer ) and hopefully drive down prices ( unlikely ) .
Whoever get closest to this wins.Most of the businesses related to wireline/wireless are simply big to care and/or listen to their customers .
And the market does NOT work because of all the proprietary hardware and proprietary software and proprietary networks , etc... . If the market was free and working as you , and many others hypothesis ; than we would have fiber to our homes already .
( Promised by telcos in 1990s in order to get tax dollars ) By 2000 we would have had 100Mbps / 100Mbps Internet access , for less than $ 55 per month , via that fiber connection to our homes .
By 2006 we would have had 1 Gbps / 1 Gbps Internet access for less than $ 52 per month via that same fiber connection .
The market has not and does not work .
The companies that play in the space DO NOT listen to customers as RipOffReports.com proves [ ripoffreport.com ] .
Enter the name of your provider and search on any term : fraud , problem , billing , and you will discover that your provider and all the other providers have hundreds if not thousands of reports .
One or two you might dismiss as crack pots , but not the volume that is there .
Also it is pretty obvious when you are reading a report if the person is being unreasonable or not .
Sadly most are not , the customers are just not interested in providing service anymore .
If they listened to their customers , no one would get an inflated bill in the mail for any reason .
Especially not for the company putting random charges on it .
I personally experienced that from two different providers over a 10 year period before I left cellular forever .
I do not mind paying for what I use , but I will not pay for their mistakes or other peoples charges .
Both times I had in excess of three years as a good customer with the provider ( obviously one time was longer than just 3 years ) .
If I had mattered as a customer , they would have removed the charges that I did not make and proved based on my multi-year calling pattern the first time and via their provisioning mistake the second time .
Both times , both companies simply DID NOT CARE .
Said pay up or else .
Sorry but mob style tactics do not work on honest Americans .
I churned and am much happier for it .
Skype is wonderful and if they went out or got bought out tomorrow , I would provision my own VoIP server ( Linux of course ) , use it myself and sell to my friends .
There is no way I would ever settle for a total cost of ownership of over $ 100 per year ever again .
Especially not in this economy .
These customer-no-service-tactics are really stupid .
They honestly believe you do not have a choice or they would not do it .
Guess what , they are WRONG !
Sign me laughing all the way to the bank !
P.S. Only Greenlight in Wilson N.C. offers 100Mbps / 100Mbps Fiber connected to your home Internet access in the USA today .
It will cost you $ 100 per month .
When they started offering service , after being invited into the community by the local politicians to do so ; the telcos / Cable companies responded by attempting to push legislature through the North Carolina legislature to stop them .
Yea , thats a FREE market , NOT !
The markets have not been working since 1990 .
So wake up and see the reality of the situation , please , before it is too late .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is called "choice" and encourages manufacturers to observe market requirements(e.g.
listen to customer) and hopefully drive down prices(unlikely).
Whoever get closest to this wins.Most of the businesses related to wireline/wireless are simply big to care and/or listen to their customers.
And the market does NOT work because of all the proprietary hardware and proprietary software and proprietary networks, etc....

If the market was free and working as you, and many others hypothesis; than we would have fiber to our homes already.
(Promised by telcos in 1990s in order to get tax dollars)

By 2000 we would have had 100Mbps / 100Mbps Internet access, for less than $55 per month, via that fiber connection to our homes.
By 2006 we would have had 1 Gbps / 1 Gbps Internet access for less than $52 per month via that same fiber connection.
The market has not and does not work.
The companies that play in the space DO NOT listen to customers as RipOffReports.com proves [ripoffreport.com].
Enter the name of your provider and search on any term: fraud, problem, billing, and you will discover that your provider and all the other providers have hundreds if not thousands of reports.
One or two you might dismiss as crack pots, but not the volume that is there.
Also it is pretty obvious when you are reading a report if the person is being unreasonable or not.
Sadly most are not, the customers are just not interested in providing service anymore.
If they listened to their customers, no one would get an inflated bill in the mail for any reason.
Especially not for the company putting random charges on it.
I personally experienced that from two different providers over a 10 year period before I left cellular forever.
I do not mind paying for what I use, but I will not pay for their mistakes or other peoples charges.
Both times I had in excess of three years as a good customer with the provider (obviously one time was longer than just 3 years).
If I had mattered as a customer, they would have removed the charges that I did not make and proved based on my multi-year calling pattern the first time and via their provisioning mistake the second time.
Both times, both companies simply DID NOT CARE.
Said pay up or else.
Sorry but mob style tactics do not work on honest Americans.
I churned and am much happier for it.
Skype is wonderful and if they went out or got bought out tomorrow, I would provision my own VoIP server (Linux of course), use it myself and sell to my friends.
There is no way I would ever settle for a total cost of ownership of over $100 per year ever again.
Especially not in this economy.
These customer-no-service-tactics are really stupid.
They honestly believe you do not have a choice or they would not do it.
Guess what, they are WRONG!
Sign me laughing all the way to the bank!
P.S. Only Greenlight in Wilson N.C. offers 100Mbps / 100Mbps Fiber connected to your home Internet access in the USA today.
It will cost you $100 per month.
When they started offering service, after being invited into the community by the local politicians to do so; the telcos / Cable companies responded by attempting to push legislature through the North Carolina legislature to stop them.
Yea, thats a FREE market, NOT!
The markets have not been working since 1990.
So wake up and see the reality of the situation, please, before it is too late.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807865</id>
	<title>Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows</title>
	<author>keatonguy</author>
	<datestamp>1256052840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could be, but I'm inclined not to think so. Linux came around long after Windows had already ingrained itself in the market and in the consumer consciousness, and even then after more than fifteen years it's still rougher around the edges than it's proprietary contemporaries as far as user-friendliness goes. Arguably this is just from the difference in design philosophy forcing new users to learn a new way of working with thier computer, but I digress.</p><p>The iPhone has only been around a few years, and it's really the first mobile that's truly comparible to a desktop or laptop's functionality (Browser, media players, apps, etc). The great divide between them is that the iPhone places very hard restrictions on not only what software you can get, but what software can be developed. This may be invisible to the user, but once Android builds up momentum I hold out hope that it will have a true explosion of apps available for it, most of them free (true to it's OSS license!).</p><p>iPhone isn't an implacable competitor, it's only been in the market a few years. Android, if it's name is given strong presence in the mind of the consumer, has a chance to do very well comparatively, maybe even match it.</p><p>Obviously, I may have a bit of a bias here, I'm not exactly a scientific researcher here, but I'm optimistic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could be , but I 'm inclined not to think so .
Linux came around long after Windows had already ingrained itself in the market and in the consumer consciousness , and even then after more than fifteen years it 's still rougher around the edges than it 's proprietary contemporaries as far as user-friendliness goes .
Arguably this is just from the difference in design philosophy forcing new users to learn a new way of working with thier computer , but I digress.The iPhone has only been around a few years , and it 's really the first mobile that 's truly comparible to a desktop or laptop 's functionality ( Browser , media players , apps , etc ) .
The great divide between them is that the iPhone places very hard restrictions on not only what software you can get , but what software can be developed .
This may be invisible to the user , but once Android builds up momentum I hold out hope that it will have a true explosion of apps available for it , most of them free ( true to it 's OSS license !
) .iPhone is n't an implacable competitor , it 's only been in the market a few years .
Android , if it 's name is given strong presence in the mind of the consumer , has a chance to do very well comparatively , maybe even match it.Obviously , I may have a bit of a bias here , I 'm not exactly a scientific researcher here , but I 'm optimistic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could be, but I'm inclined not to think so.
Linux came around long after Windows had already ingrained itself in the market and in the consumer consciousness, and even then after more than fifteen years it's still rougher around the edges than it's proprietary contemporaries as far as user-friendliness goes.
Arguably this is just from the difference in design philosophy forcing new users to learn a new way of working with thier computer, but I digress.The iPhone has only been around a few years, and it's really the first mobile that's truly comparible to a desktop or laptop's functionality (Browser, media players, apps, etc).
The great divide between them is that the iPhone places very hard restrictions on not only what software you can get, but what software can be developed.
This may be invisible to the user, but once Android builds up momentum I hold out hope that it will have a true explosion of apps available for it, most of them free (true to it's OSS license!
).iPhone isn't an implacable competitor, it's only been in the market a few years.
Android, if it's name is given strong presence in the mind of the consumer, has a chance to do very well comparatively, maybe even match it.Obviously, I may have a bit of a bias here, I'm not exactly a scientific researcher here, but I'm optimistic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808047</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>sribe</author>
	<datestamp>1256053680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Android to compete...</p></div><p>A dozen phones would be healthy competition to appeal to a broad audience; 50+ phones is confusion that will drive consumers away.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Android to compete...A dozen phones would be healthy competition to appeal to a broad audience ; 50 + phones is confusion that will drive consumers away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Android to compete...A dozen phones would be healthy competition to appeal to a broad audience; 50+ phones is confusion that will drive consumers away.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810289</id>
	<title>Re:50+ phones and still no proper package manageme</title>
	<author>PrimaryConsult</author>
	<datestamp>1256060880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What are you talking about? It's been a few months since I last used mine, but I recall very regularly being notified of app updates without ever having to browse to the apps in the store, and I simply needed to approve the lot of them in one go.
Maybe if you want the latest and greatest the moment it comes out, but a normal user would be fine with waiting until the automatic updates push it through...</htmltext>
<tokenext>What are you talking about ?
It 's been a few months since I last used mine , but I recall very regularly being notified of app updates without ever having to browse to the apps in the store , and I simply needed to approve the lot of them in one go .
Maybe if you want the latest and greatest the moment it comes out , but a normal user would be fine with waiting until the automatic updates push it through.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are you talking about?
It's been a few months since I last used mine, but I recall very regularly being notified of app updates without ever having to browse to the apps in the store, and I simply needed to approve the lot of them in one go.
Maybe if you want the latest and greatest the moment it comes out, but a normal user would be fine with waiting until the automatic updates push it through...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808701</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808893</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1256056500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Android, as a platform may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst Android phones, will prevent an individual phone from taking a dominant position</p></div><p>Yep.  Android phones will eventually outsell iPhones as the iPhone hardware is shown as stagnant.  Why do/did IBM PC clones outsell Apple PCs?  Diversity and openness.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Android , as a platform may quickly rise in dominance , but the competition , just amongst Android phones , will prevent an individual phone from taking a dominant positionYep .
Android phones will eventually outsell iPhones as the iPhone hardware is shown as stagnant .
Why do/did IBM PC clones outsell Apple PCs ?
Diversity and openness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Android, as a platform may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst Android phones, will prevent an individual phone from taking a dominant positionYep.
Android phones will eventually outsell iPhones as the iPhone hardware is shown as stagnant.
Why do/did IBM PC clones outsell Apple PCs?
Diversity and openness.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810923</id>
	<title>Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>raddan</author>
	<datestamp>1256063220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's interesting because on my Blackberry 8830 (and indeed, my last two BBs-- a 7350 I think and before that... something old) I typically get 2+ days on a charge.  I browse the web, do email, listen to music, and watch the occasional movie clip (stored on my microSD card).  I find that when I use it lightly, and I'm in areas of good reception, I've been able to get up to 4 days on a charge.  My original Blackberry got a week at a time.
<br> <br>
Maybe I just don't use mine as heavily as you guys...
<br> <br>
BTW, I'm not saying that BBs are great phones (there are many things that drive me crazy) but in my experience, they do have pretty good battery life.  Good enough that I rarely think about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's interesting because on my Blackberry 8830 ( and indeed , my last two BBs-- a 7350 I think and before that... something old ) I typically get 2 + days on a charge .
I browse the web , do email , listen to music , and watch the occasional movie clip ( stored on my microSD card ) .
I find that when I use it lightly , and I 'm in areas of good reception , I 've been able to get up to 4 days on a charge .
My original Blackberry got a week at a time .
Maybe I just do n't use mine as heavily as you guys.. . BTW , I 'm not saying that BBs are great phones ( there are many things that drive me crazy ) but in my experience , they do have pretty good battery life .
Good enough that I rarely think about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's interesting because on my Blackberry 8830 (and indeed, my last two BBs-- a 7350 I think and before that... something old) I typically get 2+ days on a charge.
I browse the web, do email, listen to music, and watch the occasional movie clip (stored on my microSD card).
I find that when I use it lightly, and I'm in areas of good reception, I've been able to get up to 4 days on a charge.
My original Blackberry got a week at a time.
Maybe I just don't use mine as heavily as you guys...
 
BTW, I'm not saying that BBs are great phones (there are many things that drive me crazy) but in my experience, they do have pretty good battery life.
Good enough that I rarely think about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813611</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>chocomilko</author>
	<datestamp>1256030100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If anything, we should see more Android <em>devices</em>--Android technology without the phone, like the iPod touch. Clearly there's a market there, and you get around the whole pesky "tied to the carrier you hate" issue.</p></div><p>
THANK YOU.
</p><p>
Know why I chose iPhone for a dev platform? Not because I have an iPhone (I don't), but because I have an iPod touch, and so do a lot of other people. I write an app, and not only can iPhone owners use it, so can all the people who don't have/want an iPhone, but happen to have an iPod touch (most of my friends fall into this category).
</p><p>
I don't want to sign a three-year cell phone contract, and I <i>certainly</i> don't want to pay $700 for a phone without a contract. So I bought an iPod touch (less than $250 at the time), and a cheap phone that works.  And guess what? It's great. If we start seeing more android-powered devices that aren't phones, but are just media players/web browsers/game and app platforms, we'll start seeing more people start to develop quality apps.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If anything , we should see more Android devices--Android technology without the phone , like the iPod touch .
Clearly there 's a market there , and you get around the whole pesky " tied to the carrier you hate " issue .
THANK YOU .
Know why I chose iPhone for a dev platform ?
Not because I have an iPhone ( I do n't ) , but because I have an iPod touch , and so do a lot of other people .
I write an app , and not only can iPhone owners use it , so can all the people who do n't have/want an iPhone , but happen to have an iPod touch ( most of my friends fall into this category ) .
I do n't want to sign a three-year cell phone contract , and I certainly do n't want to pay $ 700 for a phone without a contract .
So I bought an iPod touch ( less than $ 250 at the time ) , and a cheap phone that works .
And guess what ?
It 's great .
If we start seeing more android-powered devices that are n't phones , but are just media players/web browsers/game and app platforms , we 'll start seeing more people start to develop quality apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If anything, we should see more Android devices--Android technology without the phone, like the iPod touch.
Clearly there's a market there, and you get around the whole pesky "tied to the carrier you hate" issue.
THANK YOU.
Know why I chose iPhone for a dev platform?
Not because I have an iPhone (I don't), but because I have an iPod touch, and so do a lot of other people.
I write an app, and not only can iPhone owners use it, so can all the people who don't have/want an iPhone, but happen to have an iPod touch (most of my friends fall into this category).
I don't want to sign a three-year cell phone contract, and I certainly don't want to pay $700 for a phone without a contract.
So I bought an iPod touch (less than $250 at the time), and a cheap phone that works.
And guess what?
It's great.
If we start seeing more android-powered devices that aren't phones, but are just media players/web browsers/game and app platforms, we'll start seeing more people start to develop quality apps.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459</id>
	<title>After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256051280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have had a BB Storm for a few months I like a few features and loathe a few others.</p><p>Likes:<br>- Easy web page viewing most anywhere<br>- BB Messenger is good and beats SMS/MMS anyday (plus its cost is included in my plan unlike SMS)</p><p>Hates:<br>- Speed of the device (it feels slower now than when I first got the device and can take a few seconds now to come from locked screen to usable mode)<br>- Battery life ( I don't know how any of the Androids stack up here)</p><p>I have briefly used a G1 and I thought it was a nice device. The touchscreen keyboard on the Storm is ok, but when typing quickly it lags several keys behind. I did not experience that on the G1, plus with a physical keyboard you can type without looking at the phone.</p><p>Cheers,<br>the\_crowbar</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have had a BB Storm for a few months I like a few features and loathe a few others.Likes : - Easy web page viewing most anywhere- BB Messenger is good and beats SMS/MMS anyday ( plus its cost is included in my plan unlike SMS ) Hates : - Speed of the device ( it feels slower now than when I first got the device and can take a few seconds now to come from locked screen to usable mode ) - Battery life ( I do n't know how any of the Androids stack up here ) I have briefly used a G1 and I thought it was a nice device .
The touchscreen keyboard on the Storm is ok , but when typing quickly it lags several keys behind .
I did not experience that on the G1 , plus with a physical keyboard you can type without looking at the phone.Cheers,the \ _crowbar</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have had a BB Storm for a few months I like a few features and loathe a few others.Likes:- Easy web page viewing most anywhere- BB Messenger is good and beats SMS/MMS anyday (plus its cost is included in my plan unlike SMS)Hates:- Speed of the device (it feels slower now than when I first got the device and can take a few seconds now to come from locked screen to usable mode)- Battery life ( I don't know how any of the Androids stack up here)I have briefly used a G1 and I thought it was a nice device.
The touchscreen keyboard on the Storm is ok, but when typing quickly it lags several keys behind.
I did not experience that on the G1, plus with a physical keyboard you can type without looking at the phone.Cheers,the\_crowbar</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809135</id>
	<title>Re:Is this necessarily a good thing?</title>
	<author>BiggoronSword</author>
	<datestamp>1256057280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I honestly don't think Google is shooting for a full on take down of the iPhone market.  More likely expected, is a strong competitive market where both the iPhone and Androids share a good chunk of the market as a whole.  Good old fashioned capitalism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I honestly do n't think Google is shooting for a full on take down of the iPhone market .
More likely expected , is a strong competitive market where both the iPhone and Androids share a good chunk of the market as a whole .
Good old fashioned capitalism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I honestly don't think Google is shooting for a full on take down of the iPhone market.
More likely expected, is a strong competitive market where both the iPhone and Androids share a good chunk of the market as a whole.
Good old fashioned capitalism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29814573</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1256033160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Checkout the Motorola/VZ droid. 5MP with AF/flash. End of this month.
<br>
<br>
There, happy now?
<br>
<br>
And don't worry, SE's going to likely release a 8MP phone with CZ lens and Sony tech.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Checkout the Motorola/VZ droid .
5MP with AF/flash .
End of this month .
There , happy now ?
And do n't worry , SE 's going to likely release a 8MP phone with CZ lens and Sony tech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Checkout the Motorola/VZ droid.
5MP with AF/flash.
End of this month.
There, happy now?
And don't worry, SE's going to likely release a 8MP phone with CZ lens and Sony tech.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813659</id>
	<title>Re:Too expensive</title>
	<author>markkezner</author>
	<datestamp>1256030220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>An unlocked HTC dream will set you back about $300</p></div><p>Are you talking about the <a href="http://android.brightstarcorp.com/index.htm" title="brightstarcorp.com" rel="nofollow">Android Dev Phone 1?</a> [brightstarcorp.com]. That's $399 for the phone + $25 for the developer account required. However, it's not bad if you want to avoid signing up for a service contract.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>An unlocked HTC dream will set you back about $ 300Are you talking about the Android Dev Phone 1 ?
[ brightstarcorp.com ] . That 's $ 399 for the phone + $ 25 for the developer account required .
However , it 's not bad if you want to avoid signing up for a service contract .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An unlocked HTC dream will set you back about $300Are you talking about the Android Dev Phone 1?
[brightstarcorp.com]. That's $399 for the phone + $25 for the developer account required.
However, it's not bad if you want to avoid signing up for a service contract.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808573</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807999</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1256053500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It also means that each phone can be tied to a particular US provider, probably with certain non-profitable features disabled and certain featured added to create specific profit centers.  I see this as the PC market several years ago.  No profit in the PC, so deals were cut with various software vendors to pre install products on the PC.  Even customer data was sometimes sold.  Same thing for the emerging DSL market on PCs.  MS Windows did not have automagic connecting software, so many vendors, for instance SBC, would have the user install software that also did other unknown functions.
<p>
The cool thing about android is that it should, in theory, allow end users to get the exact phone they want.  The reality it, since the end user is not really buying the phone, that the mobile service providers will continue to design they phone they need, and the collude to provide limited functionality to the United States market.  We onlu have to go back to the Motorola Razr and look at the Nokia situation to see that mobile providers in the US will not provide anything that is not centered around them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It also means that each phone can be tied to a particular US provider , probably with certain non-profitable features disabled and certain featured added to create specific profit centers .
I see this as the PC market several years ago .
No profit in the PC , so deals were cut with various software vendors to pre install products on the PC .
Even customer data was sometimes sold .
Same thing for the emerging DSL market on PCs .
MS Windows did not have automagic connecting software , so many vendors , for instance SBC , would have the user install software that also did other unknown functions .
The cool thing about android is that it should , in theory , allow end users to get the exact phone they want .
The reality it , since the end user is not really buying the phone , that the mobile service providers will continue to design they phone they need , and the collude to provide limited functionality to the United States market .
We onlu have to go back to the Motorola Razr and look at the Nokia situation to see that mobile providers in the US will not provide anything that is not centered around them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It also means that each phone can be tied to a particular US provider, probably with certain non-profitable features disabled and certain featured added to create specific profit centers.
I see this as the PC market several years ago.
No profit in the PC, so deals were cut with various software vendors to pre install products on the PC.
Even customer data was sometimes sold.
Same thing for the emerging DSL market on PCs.
MS Windows did not have automagic connecting software, so many vendors, for instance SBC, would have the user install software that also did other unknown functions.
The cool thing about android is that it should, in theory, allow end users to get the exact phone they want.
The reality it, since the end user is not really buying the phone, that the mobile service providers will continue to design they phone they need, and the collude to provide limited functionality to the United States market.
We onlu have to go back to the Motorola Razr and look at the Nokia situation to see that mobile providers in the US will not provide anything that is not centered around them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29817477</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1256047080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most phones have such crappy lenses that it doesn't matter if you have a 5mp CMOS sensor. You're still getting pictures no better than 2.0mp upscaled a lot. The difference is the upscaling isn't done digitally(by the processor) - it's done by the sensor, so they can advertise the full amount of megapixels. In the end, that difference adds up to a whole lot of nothing. Resize down to 1600*1200 (roughly 2mp) and your 5mp phone probably won't compare to pictures taken by an old 2.0mp camera. It's all because of the lenses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most phones have such crappy lenses that it does n't matter if you have a 5mp CMOS sensor .
You 're still getting pictures no better than 2.0mp upscaled a lot .
The difference is the upscaling is n't done digitally ( by the processor ) - it 's done by the sensor , so they can advertise the full amount of megapixels .
In the end , that difference adds up to a whole lot of nothing .
Resize down to 1600 * 1200 ( roughly 2mp ) and your 5mp phone probably wo n't compare to pictures taken by an old 2.0mp camera .
It 's all because of the lenses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most phones have such crappy lenses that it doesn't matter if you have a 5mp CMOS sensor.
You're still getting pictures no better than 2.0mp upscaled a lot.
The difference is the upscaling isn't done digitally(by the processor) - it's done by the sensor, so they can advertise the full amount of megapixels.
In the end, that difference adds up to a whole lot of nothing.
Resize down to 1600*1200 (roughly 2mp) and your 5mp phone probably won't compare to pictures taken by an old 2.0mp camera.
It's all because of the lenses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29814347</id>
	<title>Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>IorDMUX</author>
	<datestamp>1256032500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been using the BB Storm for the past few months, as well.  I love the phone hardware, the browser is quite nice, the e-mail/message access is very convenient, and the apps store is beginning to become something worthwhile, but I despise the Blackberry OS.<br> <br>The OS seems to have an unusual bug where, about once every 2-3 days, the phone will simply stop receiving new messages until the battery is pulled.  There is no warning of this, and you would not know that it is happening unless you check your e-mail account with another method and see the message disparity.  There are some memory leaks and javascript bugs [I'll pull out my phone to check the time and see that a null pointer error has been caught, but it won't tell me from where and no apps are running...], but they are of secondary importance to this temporary loss of communication and connectivity.  <br> <br>Has anyone else seen this occur?  I talked (conversationally) to a Verizon sales guy who tried to tell me that it was a feature of some sort.  The Verizon techs I've talked to have said that it is a known issue and that RIM is working on a fix, but nobody knows when that update will roll out.  (The bug has not been fixed in the past few OS updates.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using the BB Storm for the past few months , as well .
I love the phone hardware , the browser is quite nice , the e-mail/message access is very convenient , and the apps store is beginning to become something worthwhile , but I despise the Blackberry OS .
The OS seems to have an unusual bug where , about once every 2-3 days , the phone will simply stop receiving new messages until the battery is pulled .
There is no warning of this , and you would not know that it is happening unless you check your e-mail account with another method and see the message disparity .
There are some memory leaks and javascript bugs [ I 'll pull out my phone to check the time and see that a null pointer error has been caught , but it wo n't tell me from where and no apps are running... ] , but they are of secondary importance to this temporary loss of communication and connectivity .
Has anyone else seen this occur ?
I talked ( conversationally ) to a Verizon sales guy who tried to tell me that it was a feature of some sort .
The Verizon techs I 've talked to have said that it is a known issue and that RIM is working on a fix , but nobody knows when that update will roll out .
( The bug has not been fixed in the past few OS updates .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using the BB Storm for the past few months, as well.
I love the phone hardware, the browser is quite nice, the e-mail/message access is very convenient, and the apps store is beginning to become something worthwhile, but I despise the Blackberry OS.
The OS seems to have an unusual bug where, about once every 2-3 days, the phone will simply stop receiving new messages until the battery is pulled.
There is no warning of this, and you would not know that it is happening unless you check your e-mail account with another method and see the message disparity.
There are some memory leaks and javascript bugs [I'll pull out my phone to check the time and see that a null pointer error has been caught, but it won't tell me from where and no apps are running...], but they are of secondary importance to this temporary loss of communication and connectivity.
Has anyone else seen this occur?
I talked (conversationally) to a Verizon sales guy who tried to tell me that it was a feature of some sort.
The Verizon techs I've talked to have said that it is a known issue and that RIM is working on a fix, but nobody knows when that update will roll out.
(The bug has not been fixed in the past few OS updates.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808611</id>
	<title>Re:Carriers</title>
	<author>Andy Dodd</author>
	<datestamp>1256055660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AT&amp;T has the least incentive of any USA carrier to offer an iPhone-killer...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AT&amp;T has the least incentive of any USA carrier to offer an iPhone-killer.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AT&amp;T has the least incentive of any USA carrier to offer an iPhone-killer...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818225</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>khchung</author>
	<datestamp>1256051580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agree, I got the same reaction, sometimes less is more. Unfortunately, my similar post <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1411079&amp;cid=29807997" title="slashdot.org">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1411079&amp;cid=29807997</a> [slashdot.org] got modded as troll instead.</p><p>Maybe I did not put it as eloquent as you did, I hope it is not because Android has become the sacred cow of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. and no criticism against it is tolerate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agree , I got the same reaction , sometimes less is more .
Unfortunately , my similar post http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1411079&amp;cid = 29807997 [ slashdot.org ] got modded as troll instead.Maybe I did not put it as eloquent as you did , I hope it is not because Android has become the sacred cow of / .
and no criticism against it is tolerate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agree, I got the same reaction, sometimes less is more.
Unfortunately, my similar post http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1411079&amp;cid=29807997 [slashdot.org] got modded as troll instead.Maybe I did not put it as eloquent as you did, I hope it is not because Android has become the sacred cow of /.
and no criticism against it is tolerate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809463</id>
	<title>Re:Carriers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256058240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They can "customize" it, but not cripple it. This is why Android is not gaining acceptance. Apple seems to be able to magically convince large, stuck-in-their-way industries to make significant concessions to get Apple's expertise. See: iTunes/RIAA, iPhone/ATT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They can " customize " it , but not cripple it .
This is why Android is not gaining acceptance .
Apple seems to be able to magically convince large , stuck-in-their-way industries to make significant concessions to get Apple 's expertise .
See : iTunes/RIAA , iPhone/ATT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can "customize" it, but not cripple it.
This is why Android is not gaining acceptance.
Apple seems to be able to magically convince large, stuck-in-their-way industries to make significant concessions to get Apple's expertise.
See: iTunes/RIAA, iPhone/ATT.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808005</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>dingen</author>
	<datestamp>1256053500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or, more choice means it's more difficult to develop for the platform, leading to fewer apps and a less interesting platform for both developers and consumers. This is already a big problem with Symbian and Windows Mobile.</p><p>I read a reply from a Symbian user a week ago in which he stated that the most interesting app he had purchased for this phone was a better clock. This is a perfect display of the sad state of affairs the platform is in.</p><p>It would be a shame if Android would suffer the same fate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , more choice means it 's more difficult to develop for the platform , leading to fewer apps and a less interesting platform for both developers and consumers .
This is already a big problem with Symbian and Windows Mobile.I read a reply from a Symbian user a week ago in which he stated that the most interesting app he had purchased for this phone was a better clock .
This is a perfect display of the sad state of affairs the platform is in.It would be a shame if Android would suffer the same fate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, more choice means it's more difficult to develop for the platform, leading to fewer apps and a less interesting platform for both developers and consumers.
This is already a big problem with Symbian and Windows Mobile.I read a reply from a Symbian user a week ago in which he stated that the most interesting app he had purchased for this phone was a better clock.
This is a perfect display of the sad state of affairs the platform is in.It would be a shame if Android would suffer the same fate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808187</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>tzhuge</author>
	<datestamp>1256054160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's great for some people, but personally I find the amount of options overwhelming. Same thing with computers as well. Once upon a time I would've researched parts and looked at spec sheets and read reviews to figure out exactly what to get. However, it seems like I would inevitably be slightly disappointed in the end. I think I enjoyed the process of the 'shopping' more than the final product and in the end it is the final product I have to live with. Choice is good for consumers, but I suspect there are many out there like me that will go with the one easy good choice over many possibly horrible to excellent choices.</p><p>For people like me, Apple is generally a good option. They make basically quality products with very good usability and design. The iPhone is an excellent phone and will remain an excellent phone even if products with better feature sets at lower price points exist. I know many times<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. posters like to dismiss shoppers like me as being 'stupid' or 'vain' or something, but quite frankly I find a lot of those people either disingenuous or delusional when they try to argue the iPhone is selling purely on 'style' or try to compare product using purely specs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's great for some people , but personally I find the amount of options overwhelming .
Same thing with computers as well .
Once upon a time I would 've researched parts and looked at spec sheets and read reviews to figure out exactly what to get .
However , it seems like I would inevitably be slightly disappointed in the end .
I think I enjoyed the process of the 'shopping ' more than the final product and in the end it is the final product I have to live with .
Choice is good for consumers , but I suspect there are many out there like me that will go with the one easy good choice over many possibly horrible to excellent choices.For people like me , Apple is generally a good option .
They make basically quality products with very good usability and design .
The iPhone is an excellent phone and will remain an excellent phone even if products with better feature sets at lower price points exist .
I know many times / .
posters like to dismiss shoppers like me as being 'stupid ' or 'vain ' or something , but quite frankly I find a lot of those people either disingenuous or delusional when they try to argue the iPhone is selling purely on 'style ' or try to compare product using purely specs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's great for some people, but personally I find the amount of options overwhelming.
Same thing with computers as well.
Once upon a time I would've researched parts and looked at spec sheets and read reviews to figure out exactly what to get.
However, it seems like I would inevitably be slightly disappointed in the end.
I think I enjoyed the process of the 'shopping' more than the final product and in the end it is the final product I have to live with.
Choice is good for consumers, but I suspect there are many out there like me that will go with the one easy good choice over many possibly horrible to excellent choices.For people like me, Apple is generally a good option.
They make basically quality products with very good usability and design.
The iPhone is an excellent phone and will remain an excellent phone even if products with better feature sets at lower price points exist.
I know many times /.
posters like to dismiss shoppers like me as being 'stupid' or 'vain' or something, but quite frankly I find a lot of those people either disingenuous or delusional when they try to argue the iPhone is selling purely on 'style' or try to compare product using purely specs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579</id>
	<title>On a related note...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256051820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...I saw the Android TV ad last night. I think it's the only time seeing an advertisement for something has make me verbally cheer.</p><p>It lampooned the Apple ad format, complete with the black text on white and indie music listing off stuff the iPhone can't do, then making a sharp cut to an android logo with a URL.</p><p>I really hope to see more well-coordinated advertising like this for OSS! This is the first, maybe the second time in my memory that any OSS has had any kind of TV spot, and this one was really solid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...I saw the Android TV ad last night .
I think it 's the only time seeing an advertisement for something has make me verbally cheer.It lampooned the Apple ad format , complete with the black text on white and indie music listing off stuff the iPhone ca n't do , then making a sharp cut to an android logo with a URL.I really hope to see more well-coordinated advertising like this for OSS !
This is the first , maybe the second time in my memory that any OSS has had any kind of TV spot , and this one was really solid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...I saw the Android TV ad last night.
I think it's the only time seeing an advertisement for something has make me verbally cheer.It lampooned the Apple ad format, complete with the black text on white and indie music listing off stuff the iPhone can't do, then making a sharp cut to an android logo with a URL.I really hope to see more well-coordinated advertising like this for OSS!
This is the first, maybe the second time in my memory that any OSS has had any kind of TV spot, and this one was really solid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812529</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256068680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you thought of taking pictures outside of the bathroom?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you thought of taking pictures outside of the bathroom ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you thought of taking pictures outside of the bathroom?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808295</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1256054640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC\_clone" title="wikipedia.org">Sometimes having a million choices helps,</a> [wikipedia.org] <a href="http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/19294.cfm" title="afterdawn.com">sometimes it doesn't.</a> [afterdawn.com] It'll be interesting to see which way this goes. I have my suspicions...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes having a million choices helps , [ wikipedia.org ] sometimes it does n't .
[ afterdawn.com ] It 'll be interesting to see which way this goes .
I have my suspicions... ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes having a million choices helps, [wikipedia.org] sometimes it doesn't.
[afterdawn.com] It'll be interesting to see which way this goes.
I have my suspicions... ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810727</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>AmiMoJo</author>
	<datestamp>1256062440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are plenty of samples from the 5MP camera in the Motorola DEXT (CLIQ in the US) on the web:</p><p><a href="http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Page=5&amp;Id=8032" title="mobileburn.com">http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Page=5&amp;Id=8032</a> [mobileburn.com]</p><p>It's slightly above average for a phone camera, about on par with the iPhone 3GS. Lack of variable focus and what seems like a lot of over-compression always makes phone cameras produce far lower quality shots than even a basic point-and-shoot model. It's a real shame as I would happily accept a thicker phone is the camera was even half as good as an already pretty thin proper digital camera.</p><p>My plan is to use it to take a few snapshots of places I have been tagged with GPS coordinates and then use my main 7MP Cannon for proper photos. Maybe one day I'll upgrade to a camera with GPS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are plenty of samples from the 5MP camera in the Motorola DEXT ( CLIQ in the US ) on the web : http : //www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp ? Page = 5&amp;Id = 8032 [ mobileburn.com ] It 's slightly above average for a phone camera , about on par with the iPhone 3GS .
Lack of variable focus and what seems like a lot of over-compression always makes phone cameras produce far lower quality shots than even a basic point-and-shoot model .
It 's a real shame as I would happily accept a thicker phone is the camera was even half as good as an already pretty thin proper digital camera.My plan is to use it to take a few snapshots of places I have been tagged with GPS coordinates and then use my main 7MP Cannon for proper photos .
Maybe one day I 'll upgrade to a camera with GPS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are plenty of samples from the 5MP camera in the Motorola DEXT (CLIQ in the US) on the web:http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Page=5&amp;Id=8032 [mobileburn.com]It's slightly above average for a phone camera, about on par with the iPhone 3GS.
Lack of variable focus and what seems like a lot of over-compression always makes phone cameras produce far lower quality shots than even a basic point-and-shoot model.
It's a real shame as I would happily accept a thicker phone is the camera was even half as good as an already pretty thin proper digital camera.My plan is to use it to take a few snapshots of places I have been tagged with GPS coordinates and then use my main 7MP Cannon for proper photos.
Maybe one day I'll upgrade to a camera with GPS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807625</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631</id>
	<title>Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256052000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Discuss.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Discuss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Discuss.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820831</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256121120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Querty keyboard</p><p>Nice typo!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Querty keyboardNice typo !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Querty keyboardNice typo!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810009</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Zelucifer</author>
	<datestamp>1256060040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree.  Its the incredibly small sensor inside the phone that causes it. I really wish some manufacturer's would realize, not everyone wants a phone the size of there pinky. If I had a smart phone, maybe 50\% bigger then a blackberry, it'd still fit very comfortably in every pair of pants I own, and it could have a bigger battery and a better sensor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
Its the incredibly small sensor inside the phone that causes it .
I really wish some manufacturer 's would realize , not everyone wants a phone the size of there pinky .
If I had a smart phone , maybe 50 \ % bigger then a blackberry , it 'd still fit very comfortably in every pair of pants I own , and it could have a bigger battery and a better sensor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
Its the incredibly small sensor inside the phone that causes it.
I really wish some manufacturer's would realize, not everyone wants a phone the size of there pinky.
If I had a smart phone, maybe 50\% bigger then a blackberry, it'd still fit very comfortably in every pair of pants I own, and it could have a bigger battery and a better sensor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809717</id>
	<title>Re:On a related note...</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256059140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not for "Android", mind you, it's for "Droid", Motorola's swanky new huge QWERTY slider handset. I have to wonder if the ad's going to be better for Android than for Motorola: lots of people are going to say "hey, I want Android", and realise they don't have a child to sell to buy it, and go for one of the older HTC models instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not for " Android " , mind you , it 's for " Droid " , Motorola 's swanky new huge QWERTY slider handset .
I have to wonder if the ad 's going to be better for Android than for Motorola : lots of people are going to say " hey , I want Android " , and realise they do n't have a child to sell to buy it , and go for one of the older HTC models instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not for "Android", mind you, it's for "Droid", Motorola's swanky new huge QWERTY slider handset.
I have to wonder if the ad's going to be better for Android than for Motorola: lots of people are going to say "hey, I want Android", and realise they don't have a child to sell to buy it, and go for one of the older HTC models instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807641</id>
	<title>Too expensive</title>
	<author>cellurl</author>
	<datestamp>1256052060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I see any of these, I say to myself $1000/yr. Thats what these things cost, a vacation to Mexico!<br>
I entered the ADC2, and if you took a poll, you would find that 1/2 of the entrants don't actually own an Android (including me), because its financially unjustified. <br> <br>

IMHO, Three things are needed, one of which has almost occurred.<br>
1. A superbabe (not Whoopi sorry) needs to hold an Android on T-Mobile site.<br>
2. Skype or such needs to work as well as T-Mobile voice, better would be nice.<br>
3. The phone must cost US$99. <br> <br>

<a href="http://andappstore.com/AndroidApplications/apps/193901!show" title="andappstore.com" rel="nofollow">Back-Seat-Driver</a> [andappstore.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I see any of these , I say to myself $ 1000/yr .
Thats what these things cost , a vacation to Mexico !
I entered the ADC2 , and if you took a poll , you would find that 1/2 of the entrants do n't actually own an Android ( including me ) , because its financially unjustified .
IMHO , Three things are needed , one of which has almost occurred .
1. A superbabe ( not Whoopi sorry ) needs to hold an Android on T-Mobile site .
2. Skype or such needs to work as well as T-Mobile voice , better would be nice .
3. The phone must cost US $ 99 .
Back-Seat-Driver [ andappstore.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I see any of these, I say to myself $1000/yr.
Thats what these things cost, a vacation to Mexico!
I entered the ADC2, and if you took a poll, you would find that 1/2 of the entrants don't actually own an Android (including me), because its financially unjustified.
IMHO, Three things are needed, one of which has almost occurred.
1. A superbabe (not Whoopi sorry) needs to hold an Android on T-Mobile site.
2. Skype or such needs to work as well as T-Mobile voice, better would be nice.
3. The phone must cost US$99.
Back-Seat-Driver [andappstore.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809653</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256058840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The best camera is the one you have with you.</p><p>There are many, many photographs out there that don't rely on specialized optics or super-nice sensor specs for their artistic value. Often, the value in a photograph is just managing to capture a moment in a way that communicates the meaning of the experience. There's nothing about this that precludes using a cell-phone camera to take the picture.</p><p>Look at it this way: our expectations for good photographs haven't changed much in the past 20 years. Sure, new things have become possible that we hadn't seen back then, but ultimately the human eye sees the same as it always has, and Ansel Adams or Cartier-Bresson are still legends for the work they did even though they didn't have a tenth of the technical sophistication we now enjoy. So, even though standards have stayed more or less the same, the capabilities of even our worst cameras have increased by orders of magnitude. At some point, even a cell-phone camera is good enough to do what needs to be done, and any more technical improvement is just for dick-waving and specialized cases.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The best camera is the one you have with you.There are many , many photographs out there that do n't rely on specialized optics or super-nice sensor specs for their artistic value .
Often , the value in a photograph is just managing to capture a moment in a way that communicates the meaning of the experience .
There 's nothing about this that precludes using a cell-phone camera to take the picture.Look at it this way : our expectations for good photographs have n't changed much in the past 20 years .
Sure , new things have become possible that we had n't seen back then , but ultimately the human eye sees the same as it always has , and Ansel Adams or Cartier-Bresson are still legends for the work they did even though they did n't have a tenth of the technical sophistication we now enjoy .
So , even though standards have stayed more or less the same , the capabilities of even our worst cameras have increased by orders of magnitude .
At some point , even a cell-phone camera is good enough to do what needs to be done , and any more technical improvement is just for dick-waving and specialized cases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best camera is the one you have with you.There are many, many photographs out there that don't rely on specialized optics or super-nice sensor specs for their artistic value.
Often, the value in a photograph is just managing to capture a moment in a way that communicates the meaning of the experience.
There's nothing about this that precludes using a cell-phone camera to take the picture.Look at it this way: our expectations for good photographs haven't changed much in the past 20 years.
Sure, new things have become possible that we hadn't seen back then, but ultimately the human eye sees the same as it always has, and Ansel Adams or Cartier-Bresson are still legends for the work they did even though they didn't have a tenth of the technical sophistication we now enjoy.
So, even though standards have stayed more or less the same, the capabilities of even our worst cameras have increased by orders of magnitude.
At some point, even a cell-phone camera is good enough to do what needs to be done, and any more technical improvement is just for dick-waving and specialized cases.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818497</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>R3d M3rcury</author>
	<datestamp>1256053200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I like Apple's stuff and you might call me a "fanboi" but you have to admit they've made some good decisions in the past decade, especially with regard to simplifying their product lines.</p></div><p>Well, the simplified product lines were good for Apple because there was less wasted manufacturing (Apple was always having problems projecting demand with less popular machines collecting dust while more popular machines were impossible to find), less problems with cheaper computers cannibalizing more expensive computers (What's the difference between a "high-end prosumer" and a "low-end business" machine), and allowed Apple to create a clear message in regards to marketing the computers (this computer is for home, this computer is for business).  I'm not as convinced they were good for Apple's customers, unless you consider being forced to pay for things that you didn't need to be a good thing.</p><p>But that's just an aside.</p><p>On the more interesting question of why are a few manufacturers releasing so many models.  It may have to do with what the network providers want for capabilities.  There may be little difference between the HTC Dream and the HTC Lancaster from a features standpoint.  However, the HTC Dream is a GSM phone sold by T-Mobile whereas the HTC Lancaster is a GSM phone sold by AT&amp;T.  So when you walk into your T-Mobile Store, you don't have to worry about choosing between an HTC Dream or an HTC Lancaster, because the HTC Dream is not a choice.</p><p>It's sort of like how you can't have an iPhone on T-Mobile.  You can't have an HTC Lancaster, either.  You might be able to go to AT&amp;T and buy an HTC Lancaster (or get it off eBay or something) and have it work, kind of, on T-Mobile (like people have done with the iPhone).  But why would you do that if the HTC Dream is basically the same phone?</p><p>As for why do different companies have what is basically the same phone, it's called "competition" and it's actually a pretty cool thing.  It can mean that you don't have to pay excessive prices for a phone that you want.  I know, as a Mac person, that this is really a hard thing to get your head around.  You'll just have to trust me...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like Apple 's stuff and you might call me a " fanboi " but you have to admit they 've made some good decisions in the past decade , especially with regard to simplifying their product lines.Well , the simplified product lines were good for Apple because there was less wasted manufacturing ( Apple was always having problems projecting demand with less popular machines collecting dust while more popular machines were impossible to find ) , less problems with cheaper computers cannibalizing more expensive computers ( What 's the difference between a " high-end prosumer " and a " low-end business " machine ) , and allowed Apple to create a clear message in regards to marketing the computers ( this computer is for home , this computer is for business ) .
I 'm not as convinced they were good for Apple 's customers , unless you consider being forced to pay for things that you did n't need to be a good thing.But that 's just an aside.On the more interesting question of why are a few manufacturers releasing so many models .
It may have to do with what the network providers want for capabilities .
There may be little difference between the HTC Dream and the HTC Lancaster from a features standpoint .
However , the HTC Dream is a GSM phone sold by T-Mobile whereas the HTC Lancaster is a GSM phone sold by AT&amp;T .
So when you walk into your T-Mobile Store , you do n't have to worry about choosing between an HTC Dream or an HTC Lancaster , because the HTC Dream is not a choice.It 's sort of like how you ca n't have an iPhone on T-Mobile .
You ca n't have an HTC Lancaster , either .
You might be able to go to AT&amp;T and buy an HTC Lancaster ( or get it off eBay or something ) and have it work , kind of , on T-Mobile ( like people have done with the iPhone ) .
But why would you do that if the HTC Dream is basically the same phone ? As for why do different companies have what is basically the same phone , it 's called " competition " and it 's actually a pretty cool thing .
It can mean that you do n't have to pay excessive prices for a phone that you want .
I know , as a Mac person , that this is really a hard thing to get your head around .
You 'll just have to trust me.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like Apple's stuff and you might call me a "fanboi" but you have to admit they've made some good decisions in the past decade, especially with regard to simplifying their product lines.Well, the simplified product lines were good for Apple because there was less wasted manufacturing (Apple was always having problems projecting demand with less popular machines collecting dust while more popular machines were impossible to find), less problems with cheaper computers cannibalizing more expensive computers (What's the difference between a "high-end prosumer" and a "low-end business" machine), and allowed Apple to create a clear message in regards to marketing the computers (this computer is for home, this computer is for business).
I'm not as convinced they were good for Apple's customers, unless you consider being forced to pay for things that you didn't need to be a good thing.But that's just an aside.On the more interesting question of why are a few manufacturers releasing so many models.
It may have to do with what the network providers want for capabilities.
There may be little difference between the HTC Dream and the HTC Lancaster from a features standpoint.
However, the HTC Dream is a GSM phone sold by T-Mobile whereas the HTC Lancaster is a GSM phone sold by AT&amp;T.
So when you walk into your T-Mobile Store, you don't have to worry about choosing between an HTC Dream or an HTC Lancaster, because the HTC Dream is not a choice.It's sort of like how you can't have an iPhone on T-Mobile.
You can't have an HTC Lancaster, either.
You might be able to go to AT&amp;T and buy an HTC Lancaster (or get it off eBay or something) and have it work, kind of, on T-Mobile (like people have done with the iPhone).
But why would you do that if the HTC Dream is basically the same phone?As for why do different companies have what is basically the same phone, it's called "competition" and it's actually a pretty cool thing.
It can mean that you don't have to pay excessive prices for a phone that you want.
I know, as a Mac person, that this is really a hard thing to get your head around.
You'll just have to trust me...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809941</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>0xdeadbeef</author>
	<datestamp>1256059920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>how do you develop applications that will run on ALL of these phones when the screen real-estate can be so varied</i></p><p>Easily. You don't assume a specific screen size.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how do you develop applications that will run on ALL of these phones when the screen real-estate can be so variedEasily .
You do n't assume a specific screen size .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how do you develop applications that will run on ALL of these phones when the screen real-estate can be so variedEasily.
You don't assume a specific screen size.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808139</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>tomzyk</author>
	<datestamp>1256053980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I agree, I think the big drawback with having different hardware comes from a programming/user-interface standpoint: how do you develop applications that will run on ALL of these phones when the screen real-estate can be so varied?</p><p>Anyone that has done a lot of HTML design knows about the headaches this can cause.</p><p>ie. You want to make your site look pretty for someone who runs their OS in 800x600 as well as someone who runs at 1280x1024. While you COULD just develop it for the more popular [higher] resolution, you could be ostracizing a large user-base who opted for the more compact screen. Then you also possibly need to add in the complexity to design your UI for when they turn their phone 90 degrees and want to run your app in portrait mode too...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I agree , I think the big drawback with having different hardware comes from a programming/user-interface standpoint : how do you develop applications that will run on ALL of these phones when the screen real-estate can be so varied ? Anyone that has done a lot of HTML design knows about the headaches this can cause.ie .
You want to make your site look pretty for someone who runs their OS in 800x600 as well as someone who runs at 1280x1024 .
While you COULD just develop it for the more popular [ higher ] resolution , you could be ostracizing a large user-base who opted for the more compact screen .
Then you also possibly need to add in the complexity to design your UI for when they turn their phone 90 degrees and want to run your app in portrait mode too.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I agree, I think the big drawback with having different hardware comes from a programming/user-interface standpoint: how do you develop applications that will run on ALL of these phones when the screen real-estate can be so varied?Anyone that has done a lot of HTML design knows about the headaches this can cause.ie.
You want to make your site look pretty for someone who runs their OS in 800x600 as well as someone who runs at 1280x1024.
While you COULD just develop it for the more popular [higher] resolution, you could be ostracizing a large user-base who opted for the more compact screen.
Then you also possibly need to add in the complexity to design your UI for when they turn their phone 90 degrees and want to run your app in portrait mode too...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809127</id>
	<title>Different order of magnitude</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256057220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The differences between Android installations are about the same as differences between Windows installations, not Linux distros. HTC's game-changing reworking of Android 1.6 contains... a new skin, and some widgets. Compared to the machine-to-machine variation in pre-installed crap I see on Vista Home Basic boxes, it's nothing. Everyone else's customisations are even more minor. Essentially, Android is Android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The differences between Android installations are about the same as differences between Windows installations , not Linux distros .
HTC 's game-changing reworking of Android 1.6 contains... a new skin , and some widgets .
Compared to the machine-to-machine variation in pre-installed crap I see on Vista Home Basic boxes , it 's nothing .
Everyone else 's customisations are even more minor .
Essentially , Android is Android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The differences between Android installations are about the same as differences between Windows installations, not Linux distros.
HTC's game-changing reworking of Android 1.6 contains... a new skin, and some widgets.
Compared to the machine-to-machine variation in pre-installed crap I see on Vista Home Basic boxes, it's nothing.
Everyone else's customisations are even more minor.
Essentially, Android is Android.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807957</id>
	<title>What Android say to Iphone?</title>
	<author>gogowater</author>
	<datestamp>1256053260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Watch your back, my brothers are coming to kick your ass!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Watch your back , my brothers are coming to kick your ass !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Watch your back, my brothers are coming to kick your ass!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813237</id>
	<title>Market disruptor</title>
	<author>DrZook</author>
	<datestamp>1256071860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>With android, google has created Apple/RIM/Microsoft's worst nightmare. They make a robust, feature rich phone OS that easily competes with Apple's iPhone OS or Blackberry and seriously destroys anything Windows Phone related and essentially giving it away for free to all the generic phone manufacturers of the world like LG, Samsung, Motorola, HTC. By doing this, they totally eliminate said generic phone companies' strongest disadvantage -- i.e lack of software and services expertise --  and they do not even have to spend any effort or R&amp;D money on it! Besides, companies like HTC that make excellent phone hardware and was previously crippled by the sad state of windows mobile* or symbian can now offer a very competitive software-hardware package by choosing android.
<br> <br>
Little wonder that <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/11/google\_obeys\_apple/" title="theregister.co.uk" rel="nofollow">  apple asked google to not include multitouch </a> [theregister.co.uk] in the first version of their OS.

But why is google doing this? I find it hard to believe that their only reason is to increase the adoption of google services (not that they aren't doing a good job at it) Nevertheless, it is interesting to consider the disruption android has caused. Google killed the market for licensed phone OS,  gave Motorola a reason to live, seriously dented Apple/RIM's chances to compete against generic manufacturers, and provided a good OS for geeks to play with, and to put on <a href="http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/2009/05/19/android-tv-set-top-box/" title="ehomeupgrade.com" rel="nofollow"> various </a> [ehomeupgrade.com] <a href="http://www.g1-news.com/2009/01/15/get-android-on-your-sony-psp-wait-what/" title="g1-news.com" rel="nofollow"> random </a> [g1-news.com] <a href="http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/10/barnes-nobles-kindle-killing-dual-screen-nook-e-reader-leaked/" title="wired.com" rel="nofollow"> devices </a> [wired.com].
<br> <br> * I realize windows CE/mobile was a decent OS around 10 years ago, but there's no denying that microsoft let it stagnate for too long. Now it's just slow, bloated, not user friendly and ancient-looking.</htmltext>
<tokenext>With android , google has created Apple/RIM/Microsoft 's worst nightmare .
They make a robust , feature rich phone OS that easily competes with Apple 's iPhone OS or Blackberry and seriously destroys anything Windows Phone related and essentially giving it away for free to all the generic phone manufacturers of the world like LG , Samsung , Motorola , HTC .
By doing this , they totally eliminate said generic phone companies ' strongest disadvantage -- i.e lack of software and services expertise -- and they do not even have to spend any effort or R&amp;D money on it !
Besides , companies like HTC that make excellent phone hardware and was previously crippled by the sad state of windows mobile * or symbian can now offer a very competitive software-hardware package by choosing android .
Little wonder that apple asked google to not include multitouch [ theregister.co.uk ] in the first version of their OS .
But why is google doing this ?
I find it hard to believe that their only reason is to increase the adoption of google services ( not that they are n't doing a good job at it ) Nevertheless , it is interesting to consider the disruption android has caused .
Google killed the market for licensed phone OS , gave Motorola a reason to live , seriously dented Apple/RIM 's chances to compete against generic manufacturers , and provided a good OS for geeks to play with , and to put on various [ ehomeupgrade.com ] random [ g1-news.com ] devices [ wired.com ] .
* I realize windows CE/mobile was a decent OS around 10 years ago , but there 's no denying that microsoft let it stagnate for too long .
Now it 's just slow , bloated , not user friendly and ancient-looking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With android, google has created Apple/RIM/Microsoft's worst nightmare.
They make a robust, feature rich phone OS that easily competes with Apple's iPhone OS or Blackberry and seriously destroys anything Windows Phone related and essentially giving it away for free to all the generic phone manufacturers of the world like LG, Samsung, Motorola, HTC.
By doing this, they totally eliminate said generic phone companies' strongest disadvantage -- i.e lack of software and services expertise --  and they do not even have to spend any effort or R&amp;D money on it!
Besides, companies like HTC that make excellent phone hardware and was previously crippled by the sad state of windows mobile* or symbian can now offer a very competitive software-hardware package by choosing android.
Little wonder that   apple asked google to not include multitouch  [theregister.co.uk] in the first version of their OS.
But why is google doing this?
I find it hard to believe that their only reason is to increase the adoption of google services (not that they aren't doing a good job at it) Nevertheless, it is interesting to consider the disruption android has caused.
Google killed the market for licensed phone OS,  gave Motorola a reason to live, seriously dented Apple/RIM's chances to compete against generic manufacturers, and provided a good OS for geeks to play with, and to put on  various  [ehomeupgrade.com]  random  [g1-news.com]  devices  [wired.com].
* I realize windows CE/mobile was a decent OS around 10 years ago, but there's no denying that microsoft let it stagnate for too long.
Now it's just slow, bloated, not user friendly and ancient-looking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29815277</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256035860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bullshit. my samsung i8510 produces crystal clear pictures with sharp edges at 8.1Mpx. the 12Mpx pixon is also very good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bullshit .
my samsung i8510 produces crystal clear pictures with sharp edges at 8.1Mpx .
the 12Mpx pixon is also very good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bullshit.
my samsung i8510 produces crystal clear pictures with sharp edges at 8.1Mpx.
the 12Mpx pixon is also very good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807661</id>
	<title>Re:Just 50?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256052120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  There's only been six iPhones ever (counting iPod Touch), and only four are still available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
There 's only been six iPhones ever ( counting iPod Touch ) , and only four are still available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
There's only been six iPhones ever (counting iPod Touch), and only four are still available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807447</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808515</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Hellasboy</author>
	<datestamp>1256055360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sony Ericsson's upcoming X3 is running Android and has an 8 megapixel camera. And it being SE, I'm sure the camera will be quite good (maybe not as good as the N86 - f 2.4 is really nice for a 'phone'). biggest issue so far is when is video recording going to improve on Android? (I think it's 320x240)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sony Ericsson 's upcoming X3 is running Android and has an 8 megapixel camera .
And it being SE , I 'm sure the camera will be quite good ( maybe not as good as the N86 - f 2.4 is really nice for a 'phone ' ) .
biggest issue so far is when is video recording going to improve on Android ?
( I think it 's 320x240 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sony Ericsson's upcoming X3 is running Android and has an 8 megapixel camera.
And it being SE, I'm sure the camera will be quite good (maybe not as good as the N86 - f 2.4 is really nice for a 'phone').
biggest issue so far is when is video recording going to improve on Android?
(I think it's 320x240)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808731</id>
	<title>Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android</title>
	<author>mrpacmanjel</author>
	<datestamp>1256056020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>worst thing that could happen for the Android platform</p></div><p>Errrr, no. This is the best thing to happen to Android. It's about <b>choice</b>. Different manufacturers competing against each other to produce the "best" Android phone is a "good thing".</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions...He would be confused and do not know how to choose.</p> </div><p>Errrr,no. Generally people buy phones on <b>call/usage charges, contract term, phone features and network coverage</b>. There is already a diverse choice of phone os - e.g. symbian, blackberry's os, iphone os, microsoft... - as well as many manufacturers.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>sorting out the features of different phones and the compatibility/usability of different apps among them... It would be worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC.</p></div><p>This is called "choice" and encourages manufacturers to <b>observe market requirements(e.g. listen to customer)</b> and hopefully drive down prices(unlikely). Whoever get <b>closest</b> to this wins. The main point of Android are these types of "compatibilty" problems (in theory) should go away. When you decide to buy or upgrade to another Android phone you can take all your donwloaded software with you. You do not have to start again and buy your apps all over again.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Having 100+ models works for ordinary mobile phones, as you mostly do not expect to install any extra software other than which comes with the phone. With a "smartphone" (I hate the term) that is practically a mini-PC, there is value in keeping a small set of uniform performance/feature profile. It is the same trade-off between PC gaming vs console gaming</p></div><p>This is usually called "progress" and "innovation". As devices become more sophisticated people want to do more with them - it's only natural. For example, "Non-smartphones" have smaller screens, no touchscreen and limited cpus - installing extra software is impractical. The iphone was the first mainstream mobile phone to make this easier - by your definition the iphone app store is an epic fail.
<br> <br>
Oh and Android is Open-source, shouldn't we support it rather than put it down. Not just because it's open-source but as a product is well implemented and deserves some support.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>worst thing that could happen for the Android platformErrrr , no .
This is the best thing to happen to Android .
It 's about choice .
Different manufacturers competing against each other to produce the " best " Android phone is a " good thing " .Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50 + different distributions...He would be confused and do not know how to choose .
Errrr,no. Generally people buy phones on call/usage charges , contract term , phone features and network coverage .
There is already a diverse choice of phone os - e.g .
symbian , blackberry 's os , iphone os , microsoft... - as well as many manufacturers.sorting out the features of different phones and the compatibility/usability of different apps among them... It would be worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC.This is called " choice " and encourages manufacturers to observe market requirements ( e.g .
listen to customer ) and hopefully drive down prices ( unlikely ) .
Whoever get closest to this wins .
The main point of Android are these types of " compatibilty " problems ( in theory ) should go away .
When you decide to buy or upgrade to another Android phone you can take all your donwloaded software with you .
You do not have to start again and buy your apps all over again.Having 100 + models works for ordinary mobile phones , as you mostly do not expect to install any extra software other than which comes with the phone .
With a " smartphone " ( I hate the term ) that is practically a mini-PC , there is value in keeping a small set of uniform performance/feature profile .
It is the same trade-off between PC gaming vs console gamingThis is usually called " progress " and " innovation " .
As devices become more sophisticated people want to do more with them - it 's only natural .
For example , " Non-smartphones " have smaller screens , no touchscreen and limited cpus - installing extra software is impractical .
The iphone was the first mainstream mobile phone to make this easier - by your definition the iphone app store is an epic fail .
Oh and Android is Open-source , should n't we support it rather than put it down .
Not just because it 's open-source but as a product is well implemented and deserves some support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>worst thing that could happen for the Android platformErrrr, no.
This is the best thing to happen to Android.
It's about choice.
Different manufacturers competing against each other to produce the "best" Android phone is a "good thing".Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions...He would be confused and do not know how to choose.
Errrr,no. Generally people buy phones on call/usage charges, contract term, phone features and network coverage.
There is already a diverse choice of phone os - e.g.
symbian, blackberry's os, iphone os, microsoft... - as well as many manufacturers.sorting out the features of different phones and the compatibility/usability of different apps among them... It would be worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC.This is called "choice" and encourages manufacturers to observe market requirements(e.g.
listen to customer) and hopefully drive down prices(unlikely).
Whoever get closest to this wins.
The main point of Android are these types of "compatibilty" problems (in theory) should go away.
When you decide to buy or upgrade to another Android phone you can take all your donwloaded software with you.
You do not have to start again and buy your apps all over again.Having 100+ models works for ordinary mobile phones, as you mostly do not expect to install any extra software other than which comes with the phone.
With a "smartphone" (I hate the term) that is practically a mini-PC, there is value in keeping a small set of uniform performance/feature profile.
It is the same trade-off between PC gaming vs console gamingThis is usually called "progress" and "innovation".
As devices become more sophisticated people want to do more with them - it's only natural.
For example, "Non-smartphones" have smaller screens, no touchscreen and limited cpus - installing extra software is impractical.
The iphone was the first mainstream mobile phone to make this easier - by your definition the iphone app store is an epic fail.
Oh and Android is Open-source, shouldn't we support it rather than put it down.
Not just because it's open-source but as a product is well implemented and deserves some support.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29814291</id>
	<title>Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256032320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because no one called you and there was no reception in this basement.</p><p>With Love,<br>Your Mother</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because no one called you and there was no reception in this basement.With Love,Your Mother</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because no one called you and there was no reception in this basement.With Love,Your Mother</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811737</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809367</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256057940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are assuming they are all phones.  A couple of those devices listed are netbooks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are assuming they are all phones .
A couple of those devices listed are netbooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are assuming they are all phones.
A couple of those devices listed are netbooks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807491</id>
	<title>Nice</title>
	<author>stoolpigeon</author>
	<datestamp>1256051400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was just reading the press release for <a href="http://www.springdesign.com/resource/jsp/index.jsp" title="springdesign.com">Alex</a> [springdesign.com] from Spring Design.  This is still vapor ware, but if they don't make it to market someone else will.  It is a dual screen e-reader running Android.  If I were going to be rolling out any device that was going to sport the kind of connectivity that people are coming to suspect, Android would have to be in the running as a free, open platform.  So I think along with a lot of new Android phones, we will be seeing a lot of Android devices in general.<br>
&nbsp; <br>The Economist did a special report last month on mobile tech in emerging markets.  They say in 5-10 years everyone in the world that wants a phone will have one, and the service to use it.  I think that is totally amazing.  At the same time I've been working with some research folks at the University of Central Florida and they think smartphones will become the norm in the next 5 years or so.  I think this all combines to paint a picture that gives Android a bright outlook.  I don't think it's inevitable but I do think the odds are good that Android will be massive.  On a side note, the UCF folks are doing education software for smart phones.  They started with iPhone and Android as their platforms but they've dropped iPhone and moved purely to Android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was just reading the press release for Alex [ springdesign.com ] from Spring Design .
This is still vapor ware , but if they do n't make it to market someone else will .
It is a dual screen e-reader running Android .
If I were going to be rolling out any device that was going to sport the kind of connectivity that people are coming to suspect , Android would have to be in the running as a free , open platform .
So I think along with a lot of new Android phones , we will be seeing a lot of Android devices in general .
  The Economist did a special report last month on mobile tech in emerging markets .
They say in 5-10 years everyone in the world that wants a phone will have one , and the service to use it .
I think that is totally amazing .
At the same time I 've been working with some research folks at the University of Central Florida and they think smartphones will become the norm in the next 5 years or so .
I think this all combines to paint a picture that gives Android a bright outlook .
I do n't think it 's inevitable but I do think the odds are good that Android will be massive .
On a side note , the UCF folks are doing education software for smart phones .
They started with iPhone and Android as their platforms but they 've dropped iPhone and moved purely to Android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was just reading the press release for Alex [springdesign.com] from Spring Design.
This is still vapor ware, but if they don't make it to market someone else will.
It is a dual screen e-reader running Android.
If I were going to be rolling out any device that was going to sport the kind of connectivity that people are coming to suspect, Android would have to be in the running as a free, open platform.
So I think along with a lot of new Android phones, we will be seeing a lot of Android devices in general.
  The Economist did a special report last month on mobile tech in emerging markets.
They say in 5-10 years everyone in the world that wants a phone will have one, and the service to use it.
I think that is totally amazing.
At the same time I've been working with some research folks at the University of Central Florida and they think smartphones will become the norm in the next 5 years or so.
I think this all combines to paint a picture that gives Android a bright outlook.
I don't think it's inevitable but I do think the odds are good that Android will be massive.
On a side note, the UCF folks are doing education software for smart phones.
They started with iPhone and Android as their platforms but they've dropped iPhone and moved purely to Android.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811487</id>
	<title>Let me guess...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1256065080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... they mean <em>in total</em>! *badum-tish*</p><p>I'm here all night! Try the sm&#248;rrebr&#248;d!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... they mean in total !
* badum-tish * I 'm here all night !
Try the sm   rrebr   d !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... they mean in total!
*badum-tish*I'm here all night!
Try the smørrebrød!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811403</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256064780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't it the transmitter that they don't allow, not the camera?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't it the transmitter that they do n't allow , not the camera ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't it the transmitter that they don't allow, not the camera?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29822297</id>
	<title>Re:More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>TwistedGreen</author>
	<datestamp>1256134200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, that is the biggest obstacle with this approach. A large number of phones can also mean a big possibility of poor compatibility among phones despite running the same OS. This could be especially problematic when some carriers insist on locking down their phones; a developer may not be able to depend on the availability of certain functions and this would break compatibility. It certainly is a double-edged sword but barring any major issues, I think in the end this will still be a more effective strategy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , that is the biggest obstacle with this approach .
A large number of phones can also mean a big possibility of poor compatibility among phones despite running the same OS .
This could be especially problematic when some carriers insist on locking down their phones ; a developer may not be able to depend on the availability of certain functions and this would break compatibility .
It certainly is a double-edged sword but barring any major issues , I think in the end this will still be a more effective strategy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, that is the biggest obstacle with this approach.
A large number of phones can also mean a big possibility of poor compatibility among phones despite running the same OS.
This could be especially problematic when some carriers insist on locking down their phones; a developer may not be able to depend on the availability of certain functions and this would break compatibility.
It certainly is a double-edged sword but barring any major issues, I think in the end this will still be a more effective strategy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810161</id>
	<title>Re:Features I want First.</title>
	<author>tronbradia</author>
	<datestamp>1256060520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean something like <a href="http://androidandme.com/2009/10/phones/first-impressions-of-the-motorola-droid/" title="androidandme.com" rel="nofollow">this phone</a> [androidandme.com]?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean something like this phone [ androidandme.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean something like this phone [androidandme.com]?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812223</id>
	<title>The Big Red Kill switch in the Google cloud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256067540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes indeed, the Android marketplace does have a "Big Red Kill Switch" of sorts, at least as it has operated up to now. That was discussed on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. last year around the release time. Never been used as far as I know.  Philosophically Google says it is for prevention of "malicious apps", as opposed to Apple's "For Apps We Just Don't Like For Some Self Serving Reason".  Of course this is from the same folk who say "Do no evil.", then turn right around and do some pretty questionable stuff, so lay on the grains of sodium chloride before you swallow.</p><p>OH, and you can always install apps through other means than the marketplace, so the Big Red Android Switch is significantly less hazardous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes indeed , the Android marketplace does have a " Big Red Kill Switch " of sorts , at least as it has operated up to now .
That was discussed on / .
last year around the release time .
Never been used as far as I know .
Philosophically Google says it is for prevention of " malicious apps " , as opposed to Apple 's " For Apps We Just Do n't Like For Some Self Serving Reason " .
Of course this is from the same folk who say " Do no evil .
" , then turn right around and do some pretty questionable stuff , so lay on the grains of sodium chloride before you swallow.OH , and you can always install apps through other means than the marketplace , so the Big Red Android Switch is significantly less hazardous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes indeed, the Android marketplace does have a "Big Red Kill Switch" of sorts, at least as it has operated up to now.
That was discussed on /.
last year around the release time.
Never been used as far as I know.
Philosophically Google says it is for prevention of "malicious apps", as opposed to Apple's "For Apps We Just Don't Like For Some Self Serving Reason".
Of course this is from the same folk who say "Do no evil.
", then turn right around and do some pretty questionable stuff, so lay on the grains of sodium chloride before you swallow.OH, and you can always install apps through other means than the marketplace, so the Big Red Android Switch is significantly less hazardous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808077</id>
	<title>History repeats itself</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256053740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war
</p><p>
Apple had one computer with one operating system (the mac)  vs one operating system (MS-DOS and later Windows) running on hundreds of different clones.
</p><p>
Eventually, the clones competed fiercely on price and features and ate away most of the market share. This happens even as apple had an arguably better product.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war Apple had one computer with one operating system ( the mac ) vs one operating system ( MS-DOS and later Windows ) running on hundreds of different clones .
Eventually , the clones competed fiercely on price and features and ate away most of the market share .
This happens even as apple had an arguably better product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war

Apple had one computer with one operating system (the mac)  vs one operating system (MS-DOS and later Windows) running on hundreds of different clones.
Eventually, the clones competed fiercely on price and features and ate away most of the market share.
This happens even as apple had an arguably better product.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808433</id>
	<title>Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android</title>
	<author>javilon</author>
	<datestamp>1256055060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are thinking smart-phones, but the day you have 50+ models, they are just regular phones. So people will look at external design and at the bundled applications and that's it.</p><p>You have the same thing with Symbian. People don't say: "I am going to buy a symbian phone". They just look at the phone hardware and bundled apps and mostly forget about the OS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are thinking smart-phones , but the day you have 50 + models , they are just regular phones .
So people will look at external design and at the bundled applications and that 's it.You have the same thing with Symbian .
People do n't say : " I am going to buy a symbian phone " .
They just look at the phone hardware and bundled apps and mostly forget about the OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are thinking smart-phones, but the day you have 50+ models, they are just regular phones.
So people will look at external design and at the bundled applications and that's it.You have the same thing with Symbian.
People don't say: "I am going to buy a symbian phone".
They just look at the phone hardware and bundled apps and mostly forget about the OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807829</id>
	<title>Apple store is down!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256052660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New products today! Android sucks!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New products today !
Android sucks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New products today!
Android sucks!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808153</id>
	<title>Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1256053980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Happy Slashdot pageviews:Angry Slashdot pageviews::Money in Taco's pocket:Money in Taco's pocket<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Happy Slashdot pageviews : Angry Slashdot pageviews : : Money in Taco 's pocket : Money in Taco 's pocket : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Happy Slashdot pageviews:Angry Slashdot pageviews::Money in Taco's pocket:Money in Taco's pocket :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29816527</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>zary</author>
	<datestamp>1256042520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsxCPMpRRK8" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsxCPMpRRK8</a> [youtube.com]
Q.E.D.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = PsxCPMpRRK8 [ youtube.com ] Q.E.D .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsxCPMpRRK8 [youtube.com]
Q.E.D.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29821205</id>
	<title>Re:History repeats itself</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256125680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you can only resize a window from the bottom right, can only find the app menu at the top left of the main display, can't turn off the retarded mouse acceleration, and need to reduce yourself to CLI hacks to make your keyboard work properly, they you're using a computer the way Steve Jobs wants you to. Think about that.</p><p>My Mac is a small, well-formed sack of shit.  If it weren't for the fact I'm developing a game for the small, well-formed and impressive iPhone, I'd throw it back on the eBay I bought it from.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can only resize a window from the bottom right , can only find the app menu at the top left of the main display , ca n't turn off the retarded mouse acceleration , and need to reduce yourself to CLI hacks to make your keyboard work properly , they you 're using a computer the way Steve Jobs wants you to .
Think about that.My Mac is a small , well-formed sack of shit .
If it were n't for the fact I 'm developing a game for the small , well-formed and impressive iPhone , I 'd throw it back on the eBay I bought it from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can only resize a window from the bottom right, can only find the app menu at the top left of the main display, can't turn off the retarded mouse acceleration, and need to reduce yourself to CLI hacks to make your keyboard work properly, they you're using a computer the way Steve Jobs wants you to.
Think about that.My Mac is a small, well-formed sack of shit.
If it weren't for the fact I'm developing a game for the small, well-formed and impressive iPhone, I'd throw it back on the eBay I bought it from.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565</id>
	<title>More choice means more flexibility</title>
	<author>TwistedGreen</author>
	<datestamp>1256051760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is one of the biggest ways that Android and the iPhone differ. With the iPhone, you have one phone, and one OS. With Android, you have one OS but many different phones. While the iPhone already has a huge number of apps available for their one device, not everyone wants a big touchscreen for a phone. Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Android to compete. Smartphones are still only used by a small percentage all mobile phone users--it's still a growing market. It seems that Google is using this opportunity to make smart phones more accessible and more affordable. I think this is a far more sustainable strategy than Apple's one phone philosophy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one of the biggest ways that Android and the iPhone differ .
With the iPhone , you have one phone , and one OS .
With Android , you have one OS but many different phones .
While the iPhone already has a huge number of apps available for their one device , not everyone wants a big touchscreen for a phone .
Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Android to compete .
Smartphones are still only used by a small percentage all mobile phone users--it 's still a growing market .
It seems that Google is using this opportunity to make smart phones more accessible and more affordable .
I think this is a far more sustainable strategy than Apple 's one phone philosophy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one of the biggest ways that Android and the iPhone differ.
With the iPhone, you have one phone, and one OS.
With Android, you have one OS but many different phones.
While the iPhone already has a huge number of apps available for their one device, not everyone wants a big touchscreen for a phone.
Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Android to compete.
Smartphones are still only used by a small percentage all mobile phone users--it's still a growing market.
It seems that Google is using this opportunity to make smart phones more accessible and more affordable.
I think this is a far more sustainable strategy than Apple's one phone philosophy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809325</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1256057820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like security theater to me.  Cameras are small.  Unless they're doing strip searches, it would be relatively easy for an attacker to smuggle a camera in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like security theater to me .
Cameras are small .
Unless they 're doing strip searches , it would be relatively easy for an attacker to smuggle a camera in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like security theater to me.
Cameras are small.
Unless they're doing strip searches, it would be relatively easy for an attacker to smuggle a camera in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811369</id>
	<title>Re:Too expensive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256064660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>perhaps he meant that $80/mo * 12mo/yr = $960/yr ~1000/yr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>perhaps he meant that $ 80/mo * 12mo/yr = $ 960/yr ~ 1000/yr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>perhaps he meant that $80/mo * 12mo/yr = $960/yr ~1000/yr</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808573</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818633</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>R3d M3rcury</author>
	<datestamp>1256054100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The interesting question is will this matter?</p><p>I'm looking in my Crystal Ball at smartphone market share for 1Q 2011.  I'm seeing a list of numbers and names and operating systems...</p><ol> <li>Apple iPhone (iPhone OS X) -- 22\%</li><li>Motorola Wombat (Android) -- 16\%</li><li>HTC Yowsa! (Android) -- 14\%</li><li>RIM Blackberry Slice (RIM) -- 9\%</li><li>Microsoft PinkFon (Windows Mobile 7) -- 2\%</li></ol><p>Now, if you do the math, you'll see that Android phones have 30\% of the market.  But the title of this article that I'm reading from the future?</p><p><b>"Apple #1 Cellphone Maker in the World!"</b></p><p>It ain't fair.  But that's how it'll read...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The interesting question is will this matter ? I 'm looking in my Crystal Ball at smartphone market share for 1Q 2011 .
I 'm seeing a list of numbers and names and operating systems... Apple iPhone ( iPhone OS X ) -- 22 \ % Motorola Wombat ( Android ) -- 16 \ % HTC Yowsa !
( Android ) -- 14 \ % RIM Blackberry Slice ( RIM ) -- 9 \ % Microsoft PinkFon ( Windows Mobile 7 ) -- 2 \ % Now , if you do the math , you 'll see that Android phones have 30 \ % of the market .
But the title of this article that I 'm reading from the future ?
" Apple # 1 Cellphone Maker in the World !
" It ai n't fair .
But that 's how it 'll read.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The interesting question is will this matter?I'm looking in my Crystal Ball at smartphone market share for 1Q 2011.
I'm seeing a list of numbers and names and operating systems... Apple iPhone (iPhone OS X) -- 22\%Motorola Wombat (Android) -- 16\%HTC Yowsa!
(Android) -- 14\%RIM Blackberry Slice (RIM) -- 9\%Microsoft PinkFon (Windows Mobile 7) -- 2\%Now, if you do the math, you'll see that Android phones have 30\% of the market.
But the title of this article that I'm reading from the future?
"Apple #1 Cellphone Maker in the World!
"It ain't fair.
But that's how it'll read...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808893</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810415</id>
	<title>Re:Battery Life is the problem</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1256061300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try to load appkiller the issue is mostly lingering background tasks, android behaves unfortunatly like winmo it does not close applications.<br>From what I can gather you should get 1-3 days, more likely 3 if you turn most stuff off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try to load appkiller the issue is mostly lingering background tasks , android behaves unfortunatly like winmo it does not close applications.From what I can gather you should get 1-3 days , more likely 3 if you turn most stuff off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try to load appkiller the issue is mostly lingering background tasks, android behaves unfortunatly like winmo it does not close applications.From what I can gather you should get 1-3 days, more likely 3 if you turn most stuff off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818057</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1256050620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>RIM OS.</p></div></blockquote><p>

FYI, Blackberries use a customised version of WinCE.</p><blockquote><div><p>For Android to compete with RIM, it needs to get serious about business.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Android is already serious about business it's just not entirely about business. The inbuilt VPN and numerous exchange applications (Nitrodesk's touchdown being the best) are better then those on Symbian (Blackberry never really made it down here in AU, its all Symbian and WinMo) and far above that offered by Apple. All this being said it does need to get better but remember Android is still in it's infancy. The great thing about Android is that you can create a custom ROM specifically designed for business, there could be a market in cooking custom Android roms for companies geared towards management and security.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>RIM OS .
FYI , Blackberries use a customised version of WinCE.For Android to compete with RIM , it needs to get serious about business .
Android is already serious about business it 's just not entirely about business .
The inbuilt VPN and numerous exchange applications ( Nitrodesk 's touchdown being the best ) are better then those on Symbian ( Blackberry never really made it down here in AU , its all Symbian and WinMo ) and far above that offered by Apple .
All this being said it does need to get better but remember Android is still in it 's infancy .
The great thing about Android is that you can create a custom ROM specifically designed for business , there could be a market in cooking custom Android roms for companies geared towards management and security .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RIM OS.
FYI, Blackberries use a customised version of WinCE.For Android to compete with RIM, it needs to get serious about business.
Android is already serious about business it's just not entirely about business.
The inbuilt VPN and numerous exchange applications (Nitrodesk's touchdown being the best) are better then those on Symbian (Blackberry never really made it down here in AU, its all Symbian and WinMo) and far above that offered by Apple.
All this being said it does need to get better but remember Android is still in it's infancy.
The great thing about Android is that you can create a custom ROM specifically designed for business, there could be a market in cooking custom Android roms for companies geared towards management and security.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809609</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>chrb</author>
	<datestamp>1256058660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To me, this is why a PC computer will never take the #1 sales slot. PC, as a platform may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst PC computers, will prevent an individual computer from taking a dominant position. When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in an PC computer, it will result in diluted sales for all 51 computers. That's not to say that some of the better computers won't enjoy strong sales - I'm sure several will - but it is to say that I don't believe they'll compete, on an individual basis, with Commodore's best sellers nor the Atari ST. This, of course, is regardless of the quality of the computers - it's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To me , this is why a PC computer will never take the # 1 sales slot .
PC , as a platform may quickly rise in dominance , but the competition , just amongst PC computers , will prevent an individual computer from taking a dominant position .
When there 's 51 possible choices for someone who 's interested in an PC computer , it will result in diluted sales for all 51 computers .
That 's not to say that some of the better computers wo n't enjoy strong sales - I 'm sure several will - but it is to say that I do n't believe they 'll compete , on an individual basis , with Commodore 's best sellers nor the Atari ST. This , of course , is regardless of the quality of the computers - it 's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To me, this is why a PC computer will never take the #1 sales slot.
PC, as a platform may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst PC computers, will prevent an individual computer from taking a dominant position.
When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in an PC computer, it will result in diluted sales for all 51 computers.
That's not to say that some of the better computers won't enjoy strong sales - I'm sure several will - but it is to say that I don't believe they'll compete, on an individual basis, with Commodore's best sellers nor the Atari ST. This, of course, is regardless of the quality of the computers - it's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813857</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>GravityStar</author>
	<datestamp>1256030940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just look at Nokia's lineup. They sell something like +60 devices just by themselves. Anywhere from a classic candybar phone to a linux smartphone.</p><p>Throwing a whole lineup at the consumer seems to work for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just look at Nokia 's lineup .
They sell something like + 60 devices just by themselves .
Anywhere from a classic candybar phone to a linux smartphone.Throwing a whole lineup at the consumer seems to work for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just look at Nokia's lineup.
They sell something like +60 devices just by themselves.
Anywhere from a classic candybar phone to a linux smartphone.Throwing a whole lineup at the consumer seems to work for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810391</id>
	<title>Re:On a related note...</title>
	<author>itsdapead</author>
	<datestamp>1256061240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It lampooned the Apple ad format, complete with the black text on white and indie music listing off stuff the iPhone can't do, then making a sharp cut to an android logo with a URL.</p></div><p>Hmm - what about the things than an iPhone *can* do, like connect to my work WiFi (which needs a web proxy), reliably re-connect to my home WiFi after its been "slept" and provide a music player that isn't a joke compared to the iPhone player?
</p><p>Sorry that's a bit troll-y: I have a HTC Hero and an iPod Touch - and while the former probably has more features and is more "open" it still lacks Apple's attention to detail - plus the iPod/Phone has a better screen and is much faster, while all the Android phones so far have been underpowered.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It lampooned the Apple ad format , complete with the black text on white and indie music listing off stuff the iPhone ca n't do , then making a sharp cut to an android logo with a URL.Hmm - what about the things than an iPhone * can * do , like connect to my work WiFi ( which needs a web proxy ) , reliably re-connect to my home WiFi after its been " slept " and provide a music player that is n't a joke compared to the iPhone player ?
Sorry that 's a bit troll-y : I have a HTC Hero and an iPod Touch - and while the former probably has more features and is more " open " it still lacks Apple 's attention to detail - plus the iPod/Phone has a better screen and is much faster , while all the Android phones so far have been underpowered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It lampooned the Apple ad format, complete with the black text on white and indie music listing off stuff the iPhone can't do, then making a sharp cut to an android logo with a URL.Hmm - what about the things than an iPhone *can* do, like connect to my work WiFi (which needs a web proxy), reliably re-connect to my home WiFi after its been "slept" and provide a music player that isn't a joke compared to the iPhone player?
Sorry that's a bit troll-y: I have a HTC Hero and an iPod Touch - and while the former probably has more features and is more "open" it still lacks Apple's attention to detail - plus the iPod/Phone has a better screen and is much faster, while all the Android phones so far have been underpowered.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808395</id>
	<title>Droid ad didn't make complete sense</title>
	<author>Webcommando</author>
	<datestamp>1256054940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would be nice if some of the items made sense. Now, I'm speaking from the consumer perspective here and not someone who reads technology sites daily:<br> <br>
For example, what does ability to run "widgets" really mean?  I think most people get "applications" and know that Apple iPhone has a ton of them...so what is this?<br> <br>
What exactly is open development to the average user?  Again, I can get lots of applications from Apple so what is this specifically saying to me the consumer?<br> <br>
I think most people will get what's the point of 5 Meg Pixel camera (for most bigger is better, right).  keyboard and replaceable battery are probably dead on for a segment of the audience. Personally, I like soft keyboards and never have changed my battery.  However, I think it makes a key differentiating feature highly visible.<br> <br>
I have an iPhone and it is a nice device and I don't get the seething hate of Apple products.  However, something better comes along, I'll consider it.<br> <br>
Now as an aside...I really don't like the generate "hype" ads that don't really say anything about the product before release.  I remember the G commercials for Gatorade  last year.  Is it a new sport clothing line, shoe, what...then turns out to be just a sports drink.  Seen these for cars, perfume, etc. and I think they are counter productive for most viewers (bigger hype, bigger disappointment).</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be nice if some of the items made sense .
Now , I 'm speaking from the consumer perspective here and not someone who reads technology sites daily : For example , what does ability to run " widgets " really mean ?
I think most people get " applications " and know that Apple iPhone has a ton of them...so what is this ?
What exactly is open development to the average user ?
Again , I can get lots of applications from Apple so what is this specifically saying to me the consumer ?
I think most people will get what 's the point of 5 Meg Pixel camera ( for most bigger is better , right ) .
keyboard and replaceable battery are probably dead on for a segment of the audience .
Personally , I like soft keyboards and never have changed my battery .
However , I think it makes a key differentiating feature highly visible .
I have an iPhone and it is a nice device and I do n't get the seething hate of Apple products .
However , something better comes along , I 'll consider it .
Now as an aside...I really do n't like the generate " hype " ads that do n't really say anything about the product before release .
I remember the G commercials for Gatorade last year .
Is it a new sport clothing line , shoe , what...then turns out to be just a sports drink .
Seen these for cars , perfume , etc .
and I think they are counter productive for most viewers ( bigger hype , bigger disappointment ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be nice if some of the items made sense.
Now, I'm speaking from the consumer perspective here and not someone who reads technology sites daily: 
For example, what does ability to run "widgets" really mean?
I think most people get "applications" and know that Apple iPhone has a ton of them...so what is this?
What exactly is open development to the average user?
Again, I can get lots of applications from Apple so what is this specifically saying to me the consumer?
I think most people will get what's the point of 5 Meg Pixel camera (for most bigger is better, right).
keyboard and replaceable battery are probably dead on for a segment of the audience.
Personally, I like soft keyboards and never have changed my battery.
However, I think it makes a key differentiating feature highly visible.
I have an iPhone and it is a nice device and I don't get the seething hate of Apple products.
However, something better comes along, I'll consider it.
Now as an aside...I really don't like the generate "hype" ads that don't really say anything about the product before release.
I remember the G commercials for Gatorade  last year.
Is it a new sport clothing line, shoe, what...then turns out to be just a sports drink.
Seen these for cars, perfume, etc.
and I think they are counter productive for most viewers (bigger hype, bigger disappointment).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808461</id>
	<title>Battery Life is the problem</title>
	<author>z\_gringo</author>
	<datestamp>1256055180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have the HTC Dream, and the biggest problem with it is that the battery life is so bad, there is no way I could use it for my main phone.  Even with light usage and bluetooth and wifi turned off, the thing is dead in 6 hours or less.    If I turn on and use wifi, it gets a lot less. Maybe 2 hours or 3.
<br> <br>
It a nearly 500&euro; phone and it can't make it through a whole day without recharging.   The camera isn't great either, but that isn't a big deal.  The battery problem is a HUGE deal.   However at a recent conference, I saw that the iPhone users had the same problem with battery life.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have the HTC Dream , and the biggest problem with it is that the battery life is so bad , there is no way I could use it for my main phone .
Even with light usage and bluetooth and wifi turned off , the thing is dead in 6 hours or less .
If I turn on and use wifi , it gets a lot less .
Maybe 2 hours or 3 .
It a nearly 500    phone and it ca n't make it through a whole day without recharging .
The camera is n't great either , but that is n't a big deal .
The battery problem is a HUGE deal .
However at a recent conference , I saw that the iPhone users had the same problem with battery life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have the HTC Dream, and the biggest problem with it is that the battery life is so bad, there is no way I could use it for my main phone.
Even with light usage and bluetooth and wifi turned off, the thing is dead in 6 hours or less.
If I turn on and use wifi, it gets a lot less.
Maybe 2 hours or 3.
It a nearly 500€ phone and it can't make it through a whole day without recharging.
The camera isn't great either, but that isn't a big deal.
The battery problem is a HUGE deal.
However at a recent conference, I saw that the iPhone users had the same problem with battery life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811737</id>
	<title>Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1256065920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uuum, the (Nokia) devices that I had, usually required recharging once a week! With normal usage. No idea what you bought or how you use them...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uuum , the ( Nokia ) devices that I had , usually required recharging once a week !
With normal usage .
No idea what you bought or how you use them.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uuum, the (Nokia) devices that I had, usually required recharging once a week!
With normal usage.
No idea what you bought or how you use them...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808871</id>
	<title>IMO Android is very impressive.</title>
	<author>mefdahl</author>
	<datestamp>1256056440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I got a My Touch 3G for $99 on the "Oprah sale" about a month ago, I live in podunk and as such have yet to see a 3G connection... I 'opted out' of the data plan, so my TCO is currently much lower than the normal smart phone user.  Why would I dumb down my smart phone, it has wifi... around here just about every public building has a public wifi access point (even the grocery store), I don't use my phone while I'm driving... so it has entirely been a non-issue.

It is a good phone, a definite upgrade from my old flip phone. Even the weakest aspect of the phone (the camera) is an upgrade from my old phone...

I got the phone before the 1.6 update was rolled out and the improvement going from 1.5 to 1.6 was significant.  If that is any indication of what is in store when 2.0 is released, I'm flat out excited.

Oh and the toys, the google star map alone is worth the price of admission... I have never been so impressed with a portable device, and I've had all sorts of smartphones shoved down my throat by employers (Windows Mobile and Blackberries mostly I guess, I've only played with friends iPhones and have yet to see any new palm devices).

So I for one hope that Android really does take off, I know it has impressed me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I got a My Touch 3G for $ 99 on the " Oprah sale " about a month ago , I live in podunk and as such have yet to see a 3G connection... I 'opted out ' of the data plan , so my TCO is currently much lower than the normal smart phone user .
Why would I dumb down my smart phone , it has wifi... around here just about every public building has a public wifi access point ( even the grocery store ) , I do n't use my phone while I 'm driving... so it has entirely been a non-issue .
It is a good phone , a definite upgrade from my old flip phone .
Even the weakest aspect of the phone ( the camera ) is an upgrade from my old phone.. . I got the phone before the 1.6 update was rolled out and the improvement going from 1.5 to 1.6 was significant .
If that is any indication of what is in store when 2.0 is released , I 'm flat out excited .
Oh and the toys , the google star map alone is worth the price of admission... I have never been so impressed with a portable device , and I 've had all sorts of smartphones shoved down my throat by employers ( Windows Mobile and Blackberries mostly I guess , I 've only played with friends iPhones and have yet to see any new palm devices ) .
So I for one hope that Android really does take off , I know it has impressed me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got a My Touch 3G for $99 on the "Oprah sale" about a month ago, I live in podunk and as such have yet to see a 3G connection... I 'opted out' of the data plan, so my TCO is currently much lower than the normal smart phone user.
Why would I dumb down my smart phone, it has wifi... around here just about every public building has a public wifi access point (even the grocery store), I don't use my phone while I'm driving... so it has entirely been a non-issue.
It is a good phone, a definite upgrade from my old flip phone.
Even the weakest aspect of the phone (the camera) is an upgrade from my old phone...

I got the phone before the 1.6 update was rolled out and the improvement going from 1.5 to 1.6 was significant.
If that is any indication of what is in store when 2.0 is released, I'm flat out excited.
Oh and the toys, the google star map alone is worth the price of admission... I have never been so impressed with a portable device, and I've had all sorts of smartphones shoved down my throat by employers (Windows Mobile and Blackberries mostly I guess, I've only played with friends iPhones and have yet to see any new palm devices).
So I for one hope that Android really does take off, I know it has impressed me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809425</id>
	<title>Re:Top Spot</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1256058120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To me, this is why a Windows PC will never take the #1 sales slot. Windows, <b>as a platform</b> may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst Windows PCs, will prevent an individual PC from taking a dominant position. When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in a Windows PC, it will result in diluted sales for all 51 PCs. That's not to say that some of the better PCs won't enjoy strong sales - I'm sure several will - but it is to say that I don't believe they'll compete, on an individual basis, with Commodore's best sellers nor the Mac. This, of course, is regardless of the quality of the PC - it's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To me , this is why a Windows PC will never take the # 1 sales slot .
Windows , as a platform may quickly rise in dominance , but the competition , just amongst Windows PCs , will prevent an individual PC from taking a dominant position .
When there 's 51 possible choices for someone who 's interested in a Windows PC , it will result in diluted sales for all 51 PCs .
That 's not to say that some of the better PCs wo n't enjoy strong sales - I 'm sure several will - but it is to say that I do n't believe they 'll compete , on an individual basis , with Commodore 's best sellers nor the Mac .
This , of course , is regardless of the quality of the PC - it 's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To me, this is why a Windows PC will never take the #1 sales slot.
Windows, as a platform may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst Windows PCs, will prevent an individual PC from taking a dominant position.
When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in a Windows PC, it will result in diluted sales for all 51 PCs.
That's not to say that some of the better PCs won't enjoy strong sales - I'm sure several will - but it is to say that I don't believe they'll compete, on an individual basis, with Commodore's best sellers nor the Mac.
This, of course, is regardless of the quality of the PC - it's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807775</id>
	<title>Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256052480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They all have a lowercase i in them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They all have a lowercase i in them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They all have a lowercase i in them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809583</id>
	<title>Re:Features I want First.</title>
	<author>jo42</author>
	<datestamp>1256058600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like you want a Netbook with phone functionality. Get yourself a Nokia <a href="http://conversations.nokia.com/2009/08/24/nokia-booklet-3g-mini-laptop-unveiled/" title="nokia.com">Booklet</a> [nokia.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like you want a Netbook with phone functionality .
Get yourself a Nokia Booklet [ nokia.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like you want a Netbook with phone functionality.
Get yourself a Nokia Booklet [nokia.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820703</id>
	<title>Re:Features I want First.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256119080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So world + dog complains about the battery life of smart phones, and you want a flash! There's a reason that flashes aren't normally used in phones, they chew up battery, they require a sizable capacitor to be useful, and all of that doesn't fit well in a device that people will complain about if it isn't paper thin and doesn't run for more than a day without a recharge.</p><p>I think there were a few phonecameras rather than cameraphones. I remember seeing a Sony that had a flash. I remember the user having to plug it into the cigarette lighter in the car because he couldn't make it through the day if he used the camera to take pictures.</p><p>It's not essential on phones, because they are damn phones, not cameras. If you want the features of a camera buy a camera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So world + dog complains about the battery life of smart phones , and you want a flash !
There 's a reason that flashes are n't normally used in phones , they chew up battery , they require a sizable capacitor to be useful , and all of that does n't fit well in a device that people will complain about if it is n't paper thin and does n't run for more than a day without a recharge.I think there were a few phonecameras rather than cameraphones .
I remember seeing a Sony that had a flash .
I remember the user having to plug it into the cigarette lighter in the car because he could n't make it through the day if he used the camera to take pictures.It 's not essential on phones , because they are damn phones , not cameras .
If you want the features of a camera buy a camera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So world + dog complains about the battery life of smart phones, and you want a flash!
There's a reason that flashes aren't normally used in phones, they chew up battery, they require a sizable capacitor to be useful, and all of that doesn't fit well in a device that people will complain about if it isn't paper thin and doesn't run for more than a day without a recharge.I think there were a few phonecameras rather than cameraphones.
I remember seeing a Sony that had a flash.
I remember the user having to plug it into the cigarette lighter in the car because he couldn't make it through the day if he used the camera to take pictures.It's not essential on phones, because they are damn phones, not cameras.
If you want the features of a camera buy a camera.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810331</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256061060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>keep a cheap non-smart-phone in the car for these situations...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>keep a cheap non-smart-phone in the car for these situations.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>keep a cheap non-smart-phone in the car for these situations...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807513</id>
	<title>Nice, but need more info</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256051520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>For example, when will I be able to get a phone like the Motorola Droid / Sholes on AT&amp;T? The chart shows that the networks will support them, but here in the US we have this really lame setup where phones go "exclusive" on one network for awhile before you can even get them on the others. I understand I could get a Droid if I was a Verizon customer sometime in November, but I need one on AT&amp;T. I haven't seen any Android phone on AT&amp;T yet - even a not so good one. I'd switch providers, but the whole family is on AT&amp;T.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For example , when will I be able to get a phone like the Motorola Droid / Sholes on AT&amp;T ?
The chart shows that the networks will support them , but here in the US we have this really lame setup where phones go " exclusive " on one network for awhile before you can even get them on the others .
I understand I could get a Droid if I was a Verizon customer sometime in November , but I need one on AT&amp;T .
I have n't seen any Android phone on AT&amp;T yet - even a not so good one .
I 'd switch providers , but the whole family is on AT&amp;T .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For example, when will I be able to get a phone like the Motorola Droid / Sholes on AT&amp;T?
The chart shows that the networks will support them, but here in the US we have this really lame setup where phones go "exclusive" on one network for awhile before you can even get them on the others.
I understand I could get a Droid if I was a Verizon customer sometime in November, but I need one on AT&amp;T.
I haven't seen any Android phone on AT&amp;T yet - even a not so good one.
I'd switch providers, but the whole family is on AT&amp;T.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808823</id>
	<title>Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256056320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WHAT?!</p><p>It is nothing like that...</p><p>Lets say an OSX user wants to try a separate Linux distro but he has 50+ COMPUTERS to put it on. He only has one other choice of Linux distro, but he has 50+ computers to put it on. The user can select what PC benefits them the most while eliminating PCs that are either overkill or underkill (I made this word up apparently).</p><p>I'm pretty sure the average Joe doesn't even know what Android is, point is moot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WHAT ?
! It is nothing like that...Lets say an OSX user wants to try a separate Linux distro but he has 50 + COMPUTERS to put it on .
He only has one other choice of Linux distro , but he has 50 + computers to put it on .
The user can select what PC benefits them the most while eliminating PCs that are either overkill or underkill ( I made this word up apparently ) .I 'm pretty sure the average Joe does n't even know what Android is , point is moot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WHAT?
!It is nothing like that...Lets say an OSX user wants to try a separate Linux distro but he has 50+ COMPUTERS to put it on.
He only has one other choice of Linux distro, but he has 50+ computers to put it on.
The user can select what PC benefits them the most while eliminating PCs that are either overkill or underkill (I made this word up apparently).I'm pretty sure the average Joe doesn't even know what Android is, point is moot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810107</id>
	<title>Re:History repeats itself</title>
	<author>itsdapead</author>
	<datestamp>1256060340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war</p></div><p>Quick history lesson:
</p><p>Apple's initial success was with the Apple 2, before the "IBM" PC existed. But when the time came to follow through, they had two massive misfires with the Apple 3 (technical problems) and then the Lisa (revolutionary but completely unaffordable, even by Apple standards).
</p><p>The Mac was not released until <i>after</i> the IBM PC had risen to dominate the business computing market. Hence the famous "1984" ad which launched the Mac. It was playing catch-up all along.
</p><p>Oh, and if you think Apple should have taken a leaf out of IBM's book: one of these companies is still selling personal computers in serious quantity today, the other isn't - having been driven out of its own market when the cloners figured out a legal way of copying the supposedly proprietary IBM PC BIOS ROMs. NB: despite the revisionist history, the PC was never intended to be an "open" system in the modern sense of the word.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly how Apple lost the PC warQuick history lesson : Apple 's initial success was with the Apple 2 , before the " IBM " PC existed .
But when the time came to follow through , they had two massive misfires with the Apple 3 ( technical problems ) and then the Lisa ( revolutionary but completely unaffordable , even by Apple standards ) .
The Mac was not released until after the IBM PC had risen to dominate the business computing market .
Hence the famous " 1984 " ad which launched the Mac .
It was playing catch-up all along .
Oh , and if you think Apple should have taken a leaf out of IBM 's book : one of these companies is still selling personal computers in serious quantity today , the other is n't - having been driven out of its own market when the cloners figured out a legal way of copying the supposedly proprietary IBM PC BIOS ROMs .
NB : despite the revisionist history , the PC was never intended to be an " open " system in the modern sense of the word .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is exactly how Apple lost the PC warQuick history lesson:
Apple's initial success was with the Apple 2, before the "IBM" PC existed.
But when the time came to follow through, they had two massive misfires with the Apple 3 (technical problems) and then the Lisa (revolutionary but completely unaffordable, even by Apple standards).
The Mac was not released until after the IBM PC had risen to dominate the business computing market.
Hence the famous "1984" ad which launched the Mac.
It was playing catch-up all along.
Oh, and if you think Apple should have taken a leaf out of IBM's book: one of these companies is still selling personal computers in serious quantity today, the other isn't - having been driven out of its own market when the cloners figured out a legal way of copying the supposedly proprietary IBM PC BIOS ROMs.
NB: despite the revisionist history, the PC was never intended to be an "open" system in the modern sense of the word.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808077</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808995</id>
	<title>Re:History repeats itself</title>
	<author>tlhIngan</author>
	<datestamp>1256056800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war</p><p>Apple had one computer with one operating system (the mac) vs one operating system (MS-DOS and later Windows) running on hundreds of different clones.</p><p>Eventually, the clones competed fiercely on price and features and ate away most of the market share. This happens even as apple had an arguably better product.</p></div></blockquote><p>Is it a war that Apple wants to win? The iPhone doesn't hold a candle to the Blackberries or the Nokias in sales, and I suppose we oculd wipe out its millions sold as a rounding error compared to the total unit sales of cellphones. This applies to everything else as well that Apple does (excluding the iPods, which was more a case of good timing).</p><p>Take Mac hardware sales and the iPhone - they're big numbers, but tiny overall compared to the entire market. However, Apple's in a place they want to be - they make loads of money where they are - while everyone's competing in the sub-$1000 area (have you seen the crap they push for it? Pentium CPUs, screens sub-1024x768 on a 15"...), leaving Apple to mop up the &gt;$1000 area, where all the decent machines live. Ditto with the iPhone - be like Nokia and sell a billion phones a month, or, sell millions, but reap up 40\% of the profits of the sector.</p><p>(I exclude the iPod simply because it's a case of timing - Apple came out with a decent product at the time just before exponential growth - lots of space (though less than a Nomad), small compact form factor (pocketable, unlike a Nomad), and best of all - fast transfers (USB1.1 vs Firewire - no competition). But that's a rarity in the world - Apple was lucky. They had Toshiba wondering what to do with the new little hard drive they invented, and saw a potential there.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly how Apple lost the PC warApple had one computer with one operating system ( the mac ) vs one operating system ( MS-DOS and later Windows ) running on hundreds of different clones.Eventually , the clones competed fiercely on price and features and ate away most of the market share .
This happens even as apple had an arguably better product.Is it a war that Apple wants to win ?
The iPhone does n't hold a candle to the Blackberries or the Nokias in sales , and I suppose we oculd wipe out its millions sold as a rounding error compared to the total unit sales of cellphones .
This applies to everything else as well that Apple does ( excluding the iPods , which was more a case of good timing ) .Take Mac hardware sales and the iPhone - they 're big numbers , but tiny overall compared to the entire market .
However , Apple 's in a place they want to be - they make loads of money where they are - while everyone 's competing in the sub- $ 1000 area ( have you seen the crap they push for it ?
Pentium CPUs , screens sub-1024x768 on a 15 " ... ) , leaving Apple to mop up the &gt; $ 1000 area , where all the decent machines live .
Ditto with the iPhone - be like Nokia and sell a billion phones a month , or , sell millions , but reap up 40 \ % of the profits of the sector .
( I exclude the iPod simply because it 's a case of timing - Apple came out with a decent product at the time just before exponential growth - lots of space ( though less than a Nomad ) , small compact form factor ( pocketable , unlike a Nomad ) , and best of all - fast transfers ( USB1.1 vs Firewire - no competition ) .
But that 's a rarity in the world - Apple was lucky .
They had Toshiba wondering what to do with the new little hard drive they invented , and saw a potential there .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is exactly how Apple lost the PC warApple had one computer with one operating system (the mac) vs one operating system (MS-DOS and later Windows) running on hundreds of different clones.Eventually, the clones competed fiercely on price and features and ate away most of the market share.
This happens even as apple had an arguably better product.Is it a war that Apple wants to win?
The iPhone doesn't hold a candle to the Blackberries or the Nokias in sales, and I suppose we oculd wipe out its millions sold as a rounding error compared to the total unit sales of cellphones.
This applies to everything else as well that Apple does (excluding the iPods, which was more a case of good timing).Take Mac hardware sales and the iPhone - they're big numbers, but tiny overall compared to the entire market.
However, Apple's in a place they want to be - they make loads of money where they are - while everyone's competing in the sub-$1000 area (have you seen the crap they push for it?
Pentium CPUs, screens sub-1024x768 on a 15"...), leaving Apple to mop up the &gt;$1000 area, where all the decent machines live.
Ditto with the iPhone - be like Nokia and sell a billion phones a month, or, sell millions, but reap up 40\% of the profits of the sector.
(I exclude the iPod simply because it's a case of timing - Apple came out with a decent product at the time just before exponential growth - lots of space (though less than a Nomad), small compact form factor (pocketable, unlike a Nomad), and best of all - fast transfers (USB1.1 vs Firewire - no competition).
But that's a rarity in the world - Apple was lucky.
They had Toshiba wondering what to do with the new little hard drive they invented, and saw a potential there.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808077</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807447</id>
	<title>Just 50?</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1256051220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Will take time till Android matches the market share of IPhone that way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Will take time till Android matches the market share of IPhone that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will take time till Android matches the market share of IPhone that way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808491</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Sobrique</author>
	<datestamp>1256055300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed. I've worked on 'secure' sites, and getting hold of a decent smartphone, which also did not have a camera was a complete nightmare. I do kind of like having a camera, but it's hardly a 'killer feature' in my book. But<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I'd really rather be able to keep my phone when on such a site.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
I 've worked on 'secure ' sites , and getting hold of a decent smartphone , which also did not have a camera was a complete nightmare .
I do kind of like having a camera , but it 's hardly a 'killer feature ' in my book .
But ... I 'd really rather be able to keep my phone when on such a site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
I've worked on 'secure' sites, and getting hold of a decent smartphone, which also did not have a camera was a complete nightmare.
I do kind of like having a camera, but it's hardly a 'killer feature' in my book.
But ... I'd really rather be able to keep my phone when on such a site.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807977</id>
	<title>goodol'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256053380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>pff.. androids. Good ol' http://imaget.net/share.php?id=87A8\_4ADDCB93 kicks androids a*s</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>pff.. androids. Good ol ' http : //imaget.net/share.php ? id = 87A8 \ _4ADDCB93 kicks androids a * s</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pff.. androids. Good ol' http://imaget.net/share.php?id=87A8\_4ADDCB93 kicks androids a*s</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807795</id>
	<title>Re:On a related note...</title>
	<author>swimin</author>
	<datestamp>1256052540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not an ad for android<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... it's an ad for a specific android phone. The Motorola Droid (previously known as sholes/tao)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not an ad for android ... it 's an ad for a specific android phone .
The Motorola Droid ( previously known as sholes/tao )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not an ad for android ... it's an ad for a specific android phone.
The Motorola Droid (previously known as sholes/tao)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808687</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256055900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as I'm concerned the more choice of phones I the better as far as I'm concerned.</p><p>The number of businesses(inc schools) that won't allow visitors to bring camera phones on site is increasing. You know the mantra 'Think of the Children', Men with cameras are atuomatically 'paedos' etc etc.</p><p>I frankly don't see the all conquering need to have a crappy camera on my phone. I carry a decent P&amp;S in my car at all times.</p><p>I'm getting by using a Nokia circa 2003 at the moment but it is on its last legs so a decent choice of phones would be great when it finally gives up the ghost.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I 'm concerned the more choice of phones I the better as far as I 'm concerned.The number of businesses ( inc schools ) that wo n't allow visitors to bring camera phones on site is increasing .
You know the mantra 'Think of the Children ' , Men with cameras are atuomatically 'paedos ' etc etc.I frankly do n't see the all conquering need to have a crappy camera on my phone .
I carry a decent P&amp;S in my car at all times.I 'm getting by using a Nokia circa 2003 at the moment but it is on its last legs so a decent choice of phones would be great when it finally gives up the ghost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I'm concerned the more choice of phones I the better as far as I'm concerned.The number of businesses(inc schools) that won't allow visitors to bring camera phones on site is increasing.
You know the mantra 'Think of the Children', Men with cameras are atuomatically 'paedos' etc etc.I frankly don't see the all conquering need to have a crappy camera on my phone.
I carry a decent P&amp;S in my car at all times.I'm getting by using a Nokia circa 2003 at the moment but it is on its last legs so a decent choice of phones would be great when it finally gives up the ghost.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812025</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>tibman</author>
	<datestamp>1256066820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be worse if cameras were allowed in a secure area with the understanding that you can't take pictures.  It is better to try preventing all cameras from entering the area.  If someone smuggles in some sort of spy camera and get caught, it is immediately apparent to everyone that it wasn't an accident.  Or even a regular camera would reveal the spy's intentions.. just look at what was photographed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be worse if cameras were allowed in a secure area with the understanding that you ca n't take pictures .
It is better to try preventing all cameras from entering the area .
If someone smuggles in some sort of spy camera and get caught , it is immediately apparent to everyone that it was n't an accident .
Or even a regular camera would reveal the spy 's intentions.. just look at what was photographed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be worse if cameras were allowed in a secure area with the understanding that you can't take pictures.
It is better to try preventing all cameras from entering the area.
If someone smuggles in some sort of spy camera and get caught, it is immediately apparent to everyone that it wasn't an accident.
Or even a regular camera would reveal the spy's intentions.. just look at what was photographed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809325</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809455</id>
	<title>Re:Any have a decent Camera?</title>
	<author>Jared555</author>
	<datestamp>1256058240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it a case where permanently damaging the camera would be good enough?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it a case where permanently damaging the camera would be good enough ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it a case where permanently damaging the camera would be good enough?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810465</id>
	<title>Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1256061480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions of Linux on the shelf! Each with different features, strengths and price (not free for the sake of analogy). He would be confused and do not know how to choose!</p></div><p>You're thinking of a wrong analogy.</p><p>Imagine what would a PC user think if he sees 50+ different hardware manufacturers that make PCs under different brands, with different designs and base hardware, but which all come with Windows preinstalled, and can all run the same software.</p><p>Oh, wait...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50 + different distributions of Linux on the shelf !
Each with different features , strengths and price ( not free for the sake of analogy ) .
He would be confused and do not know how to choose ! You 're thinking of a wrong analogy.Imagine what would a PC user think if he sees 50 + different hardware manufacturers that make PCs under different brands , with different designs and base hardware , but which all come with Windows preinstalled , and can all run the same software.Oh , wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions of Linux on the shelf!
Each with different features, strengths and price (not free for the sake of analogy).
He would be confused and do not know how to choose!You're thinking of a wrong analogy.Imagine what would a PC user think if he sees 50+ different hardware manufacturers that make PCs under different brands, with different designs and base hardware, but which all come with Windows preinstalled, and can all run the same software.Oh, wait...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_116</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810415
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808697
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_115</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818083
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808005
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29822297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808995
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820593
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809063
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_114</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808005
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810033
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809463
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_128</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29821977
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29817279
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808295
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811595
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29822503
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809941
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809325
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812025
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_129</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811737
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29814291
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811403
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_119</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807771
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29821205
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29817477
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_126</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809817
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820973
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809367
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29825853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808569
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809325
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808005
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808349
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_118</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810805
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29824249
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_121</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808491
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_123</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807767
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29819903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29815277
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810387
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809127
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818057
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810009
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808433
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807625
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29814347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809095
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807999
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810265
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818255
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808823
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29816527
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809705
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29814573
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809655
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811475
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809135
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_127</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811369
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807927
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_130</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813857
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_117</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808153
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810289
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_120</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_122</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809085
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_124</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811819
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29815407
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818497
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808335
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808863
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807625
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810439
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807827
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809369
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_20_1346204_125</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807513
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808319
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811475
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808005
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810033
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810731
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29822297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808335
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809689
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807999
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808295
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808139
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818011
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811141
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809063
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809941
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808077
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808995
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808537
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813905
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29821205
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810107
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808047
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810387
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809655
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809367
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807447
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807767
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811687
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807661
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808395
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811819
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810077
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809817
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807795
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810391
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807689
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808763
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818255
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818057
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820831
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809609
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808893
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818633
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809095
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809425
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808825
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808697
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808171
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808153
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807775
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808701
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810289
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808461
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810415
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29819903
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807913
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809135
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807701
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808569
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820593
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808689
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812161
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810161
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810235
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820703
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29822503
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809583
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807481
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807771
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809087
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807827
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808573
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811369
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813659
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818497
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808131
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29815407
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813581
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818083
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29813611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29818225
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807997
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808731
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820973
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810465
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809127
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808349
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809369
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820957
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808871
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807365
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807387
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29814573
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807611
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812661
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808491
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809325
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810623
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812025
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810331
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29817279
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811403
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809455
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808469
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808045
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809653
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29821977
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811595
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810265
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29812529
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810009
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29817477
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29824249
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29816527
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808687
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807625
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810727
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810439
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808245
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810805
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809585
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809705
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811671
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29815277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809085
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809463
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29809637
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_20_1346204.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807459
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29808217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29807803
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29820707
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29825853
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29811737
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29814291
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810103
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810923
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29810297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_20_1346204.29814347
</commentlist>
</conversation>
