<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_12_0433252</id>
	<title>Microsoft Responds To "Like OS X" Comment</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1258030620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Z80xxc! writes <i>"After a comment by a Microsoft employee claiming in an interview that 'what we [Microsoft] have tried to do with Windows 7... is <a href="http://www.pcr-online.biz/features/328/Microsofts-new-vision">create a Mac look and feel</a> in terms of graphics,' the Windows 7 team has issued an <a href="http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/windows7/archive/2009/11/11/how-we-really-designed-the-look-and-feel-of-windows-7.aspx">official rebuttal</a>, saying that the comment came from an employee who was 'not involved in any aspect of designing Windows 7,' and that it was 'inaccurate and uninformed.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Z80xxc !
writes " After a comment by a Microsoft employee claiming in an interview that 'what we [ Microsoft ] have tried to do with Windows 7... is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics, ' the Windows 7 team has issued an official rebuttal , saying that the comment came from an employee who was 'not involved in any aspect of designing Windows 7, ' and that it was 'inaccurate and uninformed .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Z80xxc!
writes "After a comment by a Microsoft employee claiming in an interview that 'what we [Microsoft] have tried to do with Windows 7... is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics,' the Windows 7 team has issued an official rebuttal, saying that the comment came from an employee who was 'not involved in any aspect of designing Windows 7,' and that it was 'inaccurate and uninformed.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071580</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1258036140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Microsoft wants things to be orthogonal, logical, menu driven, hierarchical, and otherwise fully featured. Apple takes the approach that the user doesn't want to fuss with all sorts of menus and submenus (no two button mouse for years!) </i></p><p>MS have dropped the menu approach (think Office) - but personally I prefer the menu approach. And Apple's OSs have had menus for years, anyway.</p><p>Apple applications still make use of two buttons, which you have to clumsily press a control key to access.</p><p><i>applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.</i></p><p>No, it's Apple who are the worst offenders here - just look at how Quicktime and Itunes on Windows completely fail to comply with the Windows UI standards.</p><p>In my experience, Quicktime and Itunes are the worst UIs I've encountered - anything but elegant. I have trouble finding out how to do simple tasks in Itunes (e.g., getting it to recognise updated mp3 ID tags). Only yesterday, I plugged someone's Ipod into my computer so we could watch something - only to find the software had renamed files into random garbage, distributed across randomly named folders in no apparent logical order. We had to guess via file sizes, and try every single one until we came across it. Apple, it Just Works!</p><p>And what does "elegant" even mean? What's your objective definition, and your evidence for this assertion?</p><p>As always, subjective assertions without evidence get modded up simply because they are pro-Apple, whilst I bet I - even though I give clear examples and evidence - will get modded down, simply because these facts do not fit with an Apple moderator's worldview (how does moderation work these days, anyway? I haven't had any for years, and it seems they're only given out to those who mod up pro-Apple posts these days...)</p><p><i>Microsoft is doing a lot to emulate Apple. And frankly, it's about time.</i></p><p>God, I hope not. And with "Macs" these days being Apple branded PCs, I'd say the reverse is true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft wants things to be orthogonal , logical , menu driven , hierarchical , and otherwise fully featured .
Apple takes the approach that the user does n't want to fuss with all sorts of menus and submenus ( no two button mouse for years !
) MS have dropped the menu approach ( think Office ) - but personally I prefer the menu approach .
And Apple 's OSs have had menus for years , anyway.Apple applications still make use of two buttons , which you have to clumsily press a control key to access.applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.No , it 's Apple who are the worst offenders here - just look at how Quicktime and Itunes on Windows completely fail to comply with the Windows UI standards.In my experience , Quicktime and Itunes are the worst UIs I 've encountered - anything but elegant .
I have trouble finding out how to do simple tasks in Itunes ( e.g. , getting it to recognise updated mp3 ID tags ) .
Only yesterday , I plugged someone 's Ipod into my computer so we could watch something - only to find the software had renamed files into random garbage , distributed across randomly named folders in no apparent logical order .
We had to guess via file sizes , and try every single one until we came across it .
Apple , it Just Works ! And what does " elegant " even mean ?
What 's your objective definition , and your evidence for this assertion ? As always , subjective assertions without evidence get modded up simply because they are pro-Apple , whilst I bet I - even though I give clear examples and evidence - will get modded down , simply because these facts do not fit with an Apple moderator 's worldview ( how does moderation work these days , anyway ?
I have n't had any for years , and it seems they 're only given out to those who mod up pro-Apple posts these days... ) Microsoft is doing a lot to emulate Apple .
And frankly , it 's about time.God , I hope not .
And with " Macs " these days being Apple branded PCs , I 'd say the reverse is true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft wants things to be orthogonal, logical, menu driven, hierarchical, and otherwise fully featured.
Apple takes the approach that the user doesn't want to fuss with all sorts of menus and submenus (no two button mouse for years!
) MS have dropped the menu approach (think Office) - but personally I prefer the menu approach.
And Apple's OSs have had menus for years, anyway.Apple applications still make use of two buttons, which you have to clumsily press a control key to access.applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.No, it's Apple who are the worst offenders here - just look at how Quicktime and Itunes on Windows completely fail to comply with the Windows UI standards.In my experience, Quicktime and Itunes are the worst UIs I've encountered - anything but elegant.
I have trouble finding out how to do simple tasks in Itunes (e.g., getting it to recognise updated mp3 ID tags).
Only yesterday, I plugged someone's Ipod into my computer so we could watch something - only to find the software had renamed files into random garbage, distributed across randomly named folders in no apparent logical order.
We had to guess via file sizes, and try every single one until we came across it.
Apple, it Just Works!And what does "elegant" even mean?
What's your objective definition, and your evidence for this assertion?As always, subjective assertions without evidence get modded up simply because they are pro-Apple, whilst I bet I - even though I give clear examples and evidence - will get modded down, simply because these facts do not fit with an Apple moderator's worldview (how does moderation work these days, anyway?
I haven't had any for years, and it seems they're only given out to those who mod up pro-Apple posts these days...)Microsoft is doing a lot to emulate Apple.
And frankly, it's about time.God, I hope not.
And with "Macs" these days being Apple branded PCs, I'd say the reverse is true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073334</id>
	<title>What did you expect...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258044060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What did you expect Microsoft to say?  Did you really expect them to officially acknowledge that Windows 7 is an OS-X rip-off?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What did you expect Microsoft to say ?
Did you really expect them to officially acknowledge that Windows 7 is an OS-X rip-off ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What did you expect Microsoft to say?
Did you really expect them to officially acknowledge that Windows 7 is an OS-X rip-off?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30083684</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>RealGrouchy</author>
	<datestamp>1258049880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On Windows, if I want to rename a file in Explorer, I can hit the context menu button and m to rename the file. On OS X, if there is a keyboard shortcut, it's obscured somewhere; I can't find a way to rename a file without clicking on it, twice, but not fast enough to double-click.</p><p>On Windows, in any text editing function (e.g. a textbox on a webpage or in a document/text/code editor), I hit shift+end to select all text from the cursor to the end of the line, shift+ctrl+right to select one word to the right, shift+ctrl+end to select all text until the end of the textbox. I swear there is no consistent set of commands on OS X. Between textboxes in Firefox, message composition in Thunderbird, text/code editing in Dreamweaver, fields in FileMaker Pro, and text in Word:Mac, I can never confidently navigate text fields using the keyboard beyond the arrow keys because I don't know which combination I should be using in that program.</p><p>I find on Windows, I can usually go for good stretches using either a keyboard or a mouse, whereas on a mac I need to constantly be using both.</p><p>- RG&gt;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On Windows , if I want to rename a file in Explorer , I can hit the context menu button and m to rename the file .
On OS X , if there is a keyboard shortcut , it 's obscured somewhere ; I ca n't find a way to rename a file without clicking on it , twice , but not fast enough to double-click.On Windows , in any text editing function ( e.g .
a textbox on a webpage or in a document/text/code editor ) , I hit shift + end to select all text from the cursor to the end of the line , shift + ctrl + right to select one word to the right , shift + ctrl + end to select all text until the end of the textbox .
I swear there is no consistent set of commands on OS X. Between textboxes in Firefox , message composition in Thunderbird , text/code editing in Dreamweaver , fields in FileMaker Pro , and text in Word : Mac , I can never confidently navigate text fields using the keyboard beyond the arrow keys because I do n't know which combination I should be using in that program.I find on Windows , I can usually go for good stretches using either a keyboard or a mouse , whereas on a mac I need to constantly be using both.- RG &gt;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On Windows, if I want to rename a file in Explorer, I can hit the context menu button and m to rename the file.
On OS X, if there is a keyboard shortcut, it's obscured somewhere; I can't find a way to rename a file without clicking on it, twice, but not fast enough to double-click.On Windows, in any text editing function (e.g.
a textbox on a webpage or in a document/text/code editor), I hit shift+end to select all text from the cursor to the end of the line, shift+ctrl+right to select one word to the right, shift+ctrl+end to select all text until the end of the textbox.
I swear there is no consistent set of commands on OS X. Between textboxes in Firefox, message composition in Thunderbird, text/code editing in Dreamweaver, fields in FileMaker Pro, and text in Word:Mac, I can never confidently navigate text fields using the keyboard beyond the arrow keys because I don't know which combination I should be using in that program.I find on Windows, I can usually go for good stretches using either a keyboard or a mouse, whereas on a mac I need to constantly be using both.- RG&gt;</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30080356</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>JStegmaier</author>
	<datestamp>1258025280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As Henry Ford said, "If I asked my customers what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse."</htmltext>
<tokenext>As Henry Ford said , " If I asked my customers what they wanted , they would have said a faster horse .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As Henry Ford said, "If I asked my customers what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075608</id>
	<title>Re:Quick, name one technology...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258052040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Besides the EULA that Microsoft actually invented. Serious question, not trolling. What new technology, not just old tech with a new name, has Microsoft actually invented?</p></div></blockquote><p>Direct X, remote desktop protocol (the new features go beyond any other system out there atm), Legacy Plug and Play, AGLP/AGGDLP/AGUDLP, Windows Media Audio (with a tonne of codecs), Windows Media Video (with a tonne of codecs) and that's just from the top of my head.</p><p>Hope this was helpful.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides the EULA that Microsoft actually invented .
Serious question , not trolling .
What new technology , not just old tech with a new name , has Microsoft actually invented ? Direct X , remote desktop protocol ( the new features go beyond any other system out there atm ) , Legacy Plug and Play , AGLP/AGGDLP/AGUDLP , Windows Media Audio ( with a tonne of codecs ) , Windows Media Video ( with a tonne of codecs ) and that 's just from the top of my head.Hope this was helpful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides the EULA that Microsoft actually invented.
Serious question, not trolling.
What new technology, not just old tech with a new name, has Microsoft actually invented?Direct X, remote desktop protocol (the new features go beyond any other system out there atm), Legacy Plug and Play, AGLP/AGGDLP/AGUDLP, Windows Media Audio (with a tonne of codecs), Windows Media Video (with a tonne of codecs) and that's just from the top of my head.Hope this was helpful.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071594</id>
	<title>I'm a Mac</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258036320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a Mac, and Windows 7 was my idea!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a Mac , and Windows 7 was my idea !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a Mac, and Windows 7 was my idea!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081978</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>w0mprat</author>
	<datestamp>1258033620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or people actually check facts rather than take FUD literally. Anyone could actually try Windows 7 and realise the task bar is still very much the Windows paradigm, like the rest of it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or people actually check facts rather than take FUD literally .
Anyone could actually try Windows 7 and realise the task bar is still very much the Windows paradigm , like the rest of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or people actually check facts rather than take FUD literally.
Anyone could actually try Windows 7 and realise the task bar is still very much the Windows paradigm, like the rest of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071394</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258034700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>..0<br>OMGBBQ!!!!! Gnome is bettar than both!!!!! and anyway it all comes from PARC work blah blah GEM blah blah Amiga blah<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>..0OMGBBQ ! ! ! ! !
Gnome is bettar than both ! ! ! ! !
and anyway it all comes from PARC work blah blah GEM blah blah Amiga blah ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..0OMGBBQ!!!!!
Gnome is bettar than both!!!!!
and anyway it all comes from PARC work blah blah GEM blah blah Amiga blah ....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30097250</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>sanyacid</author>
	<datestamp>1258212120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That was quite an uninformed comment. Pressing Alt on Windows is same as Ctrl+F2 on OS X - you focus on menubar. Then you can use arrow keys to move around or press F, S or whatever you want to move directly to desired item.<br>
We live and learn.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That was quite an uninformed comment .
Pressing Alt on Windows is same as Ctrl + F2 on OS X - you focus on menubar .
Then you can use arrow keys to move around or press F , S or whatever you want to move directly to desired item .
We live and learn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was quite an uninformed comment.
Pressing Alt on Windows is same as Ctrl+F2 on OS X - you focus on menubar.
Then you can use arrow keys to move around or press F, S or whatever you want to move directly to desired item.
We live and learn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>caseih</author>
	<datestamp>1258038120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Definitely sounds like person who has only used a Mac on occasion.  I used to think like you about it until I actually used a Mac for a while.  Actually I find OS X and most OS X applications to be more keyboard-friendly than Windows.  Every single command you use frequently has or can be assigned a command-something combination (or control-something).  So things like open, close, print, save are always assigned the same command key sequence across all apps.  That's a time saver right there.  Why alt-f-s when command-s will do?  While most Windows users will actually click on file-&gt;save to save their document, very few Mac users I've seen bother with clicking on the menus for most common tasks; it's all done with the keyboard.</p><p>As was said earlier in the discussion, OS X and Windows come from very different philosophies.  You speak of how you want to explore the menu.  On OS X that's absolutely wrong.  If you have to explore the menu to find something, then someone screwed up. Deep, nested menus are considered bad on OS X.  Besides, alt-something-something-something reminds me of emacs!</p><p>There are many inconsistencies in OS X that are legitimate grievances.  But not being able to alt-something-something-something the menu doesn't appear to me to be that important.  I'm far more frustrated on a daily basis by how OS X eats the click that focuses a window (now I use command-tab and command-` to focus windows anyway without the mouse), that you have enable keyboard navigation in dialog boxes as it's off by default, and that carbon and cocoa apps behave so differently.</p><p>Both systems have their inconsistencies, and both are getting better in this regard.  And from what I can tell from using Windows 7, Windows is getting more usable and mac-like all the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Definitely sounds like person who has only used a Mac on occasion .
I used to think like you about it until I actually used a Mac for a while .
Actually I find OS X and most OS X applications to be more keyboard-friendly than Windows .
Every single command you use frequently has or can be assigned a command-something combination ( or control-something ) .
So things like open , close , print , save are always assigned the same command key sequence across all apps .
That 's a time saver right there .
Why alt-f-s when command-s will do ?
While most Windows users will actually click on file- &gt; save to save their document , very few Mac users I 've seen bother with clicking on the menus for most common tasks ; it 's all done with the keyboard.As was said earlier in the discussion , OS X and Windows come from very different philosophies .
You speak of how you want to explore the menu .
On OS X that 's absolutely wrong .
If you have to explore the menu to find something , then someone screwed up .
Deep , nested menus are considered bad on OS X. Besides , alt-something-something-something reminds me of emacs ! There are many inconsistencies in OS X that are legitimate grievances .
But not being able to alt-something-something-something the menu does n't appear to me to be that important .
I 'm far more frustrated on a daily basis by how OS X eats the click that focuses a window ( now I use command-tab and command- ` to focus windows anyway without the mouse ) , that you have enable keyboard navigation in dialog boxes as it 's off by default , and that carbon and cocoa apps behave so differently.Both systems have their inconsistencies , and both are getting better in this regard .
And from what I can tell from using Windows 7 , Windows is getting more usable and mac-like all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Definitely sounds like person who has only used a Mac on occasion.
I used to think like you about it until I actually used a Mac for a while.
Actually I find OS X and most OS X applications to be more keyboard-friendly than Windows.
Every single command you use frequently has or can be assigned a command-something combination (or control-something).
So things like open, close, print, save are always assigned the same command key sequence across all apps.
That's a time saver right there.
Why alt-f-s when command-s will do?
While most Windows users will actually click on file-&gt;save to save their document, very few Mac users I've seen bother with clicking on the menus for most common tasks; it's all done with the keyboard.As was said earlier in the discussion, OS X and Windows come from very different philosophies.
You speak of how you want to explore the menu.
On OS X that's absolutely wrong.
If you have to explore the menu to find something, then someone screwed up.
Deep, nested menus are considered bad on OS X.  Besides, alt-something-something-something reminds me of emacs!There are many inconsistencies in OS X that are legitimate grievances.
But not being able to alt-something-something-something the menu doesn't appear to me to be that important.
I'm far more frustrated on a daily basis by how OS X eats the click that focuses a window (now I use command-tab and command-` to focus windows anyway without the mouse), that you have enable keyboard navigation in dialog boxes as it's off by default, and that carbon and cocoa apps behave so differently.Both systems have their inconsistencies, and both are getting better in this regard.
And from what I can tell from using Windows 7, Windows is getting more usable and mac-like all the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30085366</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258118100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As Henry Ford once said:<br>"If we had asked our customers what they wanted they would have asked for faster horses".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As Henry Ford once said : " If we had asked our customers what they wanted they would have asked for faster horses " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As Henry Ford once said:"If we had asked our customers what they wanted they would have asked for faster horses".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077962</id>
	<title>Re:Things not to do if you like your job</title>
	<author>CSHARP123</author>
	<datestamp>1258016760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That says why there was a hole in the bucket</htmltext>
<tokenext>That says why there was a hole in the bucket</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That says why there was a hole in the bucket</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073798</id>
	<title>Re:Look and Feel</title>
	<author>celle</author>
	<datestamp>1258046340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Considering Apple's litigious nature and the fact that it once sued Microsoft for allegedly infringing on the MacOS "look and feel""</p><p>Apple lost as the court said you can't sue over 'look and feel', so what's all this whining about lawyers again?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Considering Apple 's litigious nature and the fact that it once sued Microsoft for allegedly infringing on the MacOS " look and feel " " Apple lost as the court said you ca n't sue over 'look and feel ' , so what 's all this whining about lawyers again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Considering Apple's litigious nature and the fact that it once sued Microsoft for allegedly infringing on the MacOS "look and feel""Apple lost as the court said you can't sue over 'look and feel', so what's all this whining about lawyers again?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075306</id>
	<title>Re:Should've named it Vista7 or Vista-II instead..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258051140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The original working name for 7 was Vista R2. So, you're not far off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The original working name for 7 was Vista R2 .
So , you 're not far off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original working name for 7 was Vista R2.
So, you're not far off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081042</id>
	<title>Re:they've been copying Mac all along...</title>
	<author>arminw</author>
	<datestamp>1258028220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>........For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple's work!....</p><p>Of course that is the reason why Microsoft didn't let Apple die, but gave them some money and promised to continue developing  Office for the Mac. They knew that if Apple bit the dust, there goes Microsoft's research and development department.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>........For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple 's work ! ....Of course that is the reason why Microsoft did n't let Apple die , but gave them some money and promised to continue developing Office for the Mac .
They knew that if Apple bit the dust , there goes Microsoft 's research and development department .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>........For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple's work!....Of course that is the reason why Microsoft didn't let Apple die, but gave them some money and promised to continue developing  Office for the Mac.
They knew that if Apple bit the dust, there goes Microsoft's research and development department.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074024</id>
	<title>If it was...</title>
	<author>alexborges</author>
	<datestamp>1258047360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anything like OSX, it woudlve actually made sense. It isnt, thats why its crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anything like OSX , it woudlve actually made sense .
It isnt , thats why its crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anything like OSX, it woudlve actually made sense.
It isnt, thats why its crap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071816</id>
	<title>Re:Things not to do if you like your job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258037640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would probably go with  defecating on the CEO's desk, being caught copulating with cleaning equipment, and attempting to snort toner out of the photocopier would take up those top slots, but hey, if you think you can get away with one of those...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would probably go with defecating on the CEO 's desk , being caught copulating with cleaning equipment , and attempting to snort toner out of the photocopier would take up those top slots , but hey , if you think you can get away with one of those.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would probably go with  defecating on the CEO's desk, being caught copulating with cleaning equipment, and attempting to snort toner out of the photocopier would take up those top slots, but hey, if you think you can get away with one of those...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071490</id>
	<title>This is not like OS X!</title>
	<author>zebslash</author>
	<datestamp>1258035540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft has issued an official rebuttal: "We never used OS X as a source of inspiration in the design of Windows 7. This is completely uninformed. We used KDE 4 instead".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft has issued an official rebuttal : " We never used OS X as a source of inspiration in the design of Windows 7 .
This is completely uninformed .
We used KDE 4 instead " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft has issued an official rebuttal: "We never used OS X as a source of inspiration in the design of Windows 7.
This is completely uninformed.
We used KDE 4 instead".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072288</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258039860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right click functionality is the single greatest UI feature EVER!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right click functionality is the single greatest UI feature EVER !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right click functionality is the single greatest UI feature EVER!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071900</id>
	<title>Sounds like....</title>
	<author>SendBot</author>
	<datestamp>1258038000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sounds like someone doesn't want to get sued by apple for defamation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sounds like someone does n't want to get sued by apple for defamation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sounds like someone doesn't want to get sued by apple for defamation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071624</id>
	<title>Underwriters</title>
	<author>SgtChaireBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1258036500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>In 1994 and earlier:<blockquote><div><p>Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 709 F.Supp. 925 (N.D.Cal.1989) (Apple I); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 717 F.Supp. 1428 (N.D.Cal.1989) (Apple II); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 759 F.Supp. 1444 (N.D.Cal.1991) (Apple III); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 779 F.Supp. 133 (N.D.Cal.1991) (Apple IV); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 799 F.Supp. 1006 (N.D.Cal.1992) (Apple V); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 821 F.Supp. 616 (N.D.Cal.1993) (Apple VI).</p></div>

</blockquote><p>

And in 2003:</p><blockquote><div><p> <em>8.  In 1995, Microsoft introduced a software package called Windows 95, which announced itself as the first operating system for Intel-compatible PCs that exhibited the same sort of integrated features as the Mac OS running PCs manufactured by Apple Computer, Inc. ("Apple"). Windows 95 enjoyed unprecedented popularity with consumers, and in June 1998, Microsoft released its successor, Windows 98. </em> <br> <a href="http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm" title="justice.gov">UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant.   COURT'S FINDINGS OF FACT </a> [justice.gov]</p></div> </blockquote><p>

And in 2005:</p><blockquote><div><p> <em>"They can't even copy fast,"
</em></p></div> </blockquote><p>
It is truly bizarre that average people allow the shills to make noise promoting such incompetence.   Look at their <a href="http://news.softpedia.com/news/Latest-Vista-Features-Are-Inexplicably-Exactly-Like-The-Ones-In-Tiger-But-Different-15928.shtml" title="softpedia.com">search engine payment bug</a> [softpedia.com] and you are reminded yet again what kind of people they must scrape the bottom of the barrel to get.  Not just known-nothings, but fresh-out-of-school ones at that.  Sadly that scam has gone on for a generation.  What happens if they get into schools or colleges and start posing as staff or faculty??</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In 1994 and earlier : Apple Computer , Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. , 709 F.Supp .
925 ( N.D.Cal.1989 ) ( Apple I ) ; Apple Computer , Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. , 717 F.Supp .
1428 ( N.D.Cal.1989 ) ( Apple II ) ; Apple Computer , Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. , 759 F.Supp .
1444 ( N.D.Cal.1991 ) ( Apple III ) ; Apple Computer , Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. , 779 F.Supp .
133 ( N.D.Cal.1991 ) ( Apple IV ) ; Apple Computer , Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. , 799 F.Supp .
1006 ( N.D.Cal.1992 ) ( Apple V ) ; Apple Computer , Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. , 821 F.Supp .
616 ( N.D.Cal.1993 ) ( Apple VI ) .
And in 2003 : 8 .
In 1995 , Microsoft introduced a software package called Windows 95 , which announced itself as the first operating system for Intel-compatible PCs that exhibited the same sort of integrated features as the Mac OS running PCs manufactured by Apple Computer , Inc. ( " Apple " ) . Windows 95 enjoyed unprecedented popularity with consumers , and in June 1998 , Microsoft released its successor , Windows 98 .
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff , vs. MICROSOFT CORPORATION , Defendant .
COURT 'S FINDINGS OF FACT [ justice.gov ] And in 2005 : " They ca n't even copy fast , " It is truly bizarre that average people allow the shills to make noise promoting such incompetence .
Look at their search engine payment bug [ softpedia.com ] and you are reminded yet again what kind of people they must scrape the bottom of the barrel to get .
Not just known-nothings , but fresh-out-of-school ones at that .
Sadly that scam has gone on for a generation .
What happens if they get into schools or colleges and start posing as staff or faculty ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In 1994 and earlier:Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 709 F.Supp.
925 (N.D.Cal.1989) (Apple I); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 717 F.Supp.
1428 (N.D.Cal.1989) (Apple II); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 759 F.Supp.
1444 (N.D.Cal.1991) (Apple III); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 779 F.Supp.
133 (N.D.Cal.1991) (Apple IV); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 799 F.Supp.
1006 (N.D.Cal.1992) (Apple V); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 821 F.Supp.
616 (N.D.Cal.1993) (Apple VI).
And in 2003: 8.
In 1995, Microsoft introduced a software package called Windows 95, which announced itself as the first operating system for Intel-compatible PCs that exhibited the same sort of integrated features as the Mac OS running PCs manufactured by Apple Computer, Inc. ("Apple"). Windows 95 enjoyed unprecedented popularity with consumers, and in June 1998, Microsoft released its successor, Windows 98.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant.
COURT'S FINDINGS OF FACT  [justice.gov] 

And in 2005: "They can't even copy fast,"
 
It is truly bizarre that average people allow the shills to make noise promoting such incompetence.
Look at their search engine payment bug [softpedia.com] and you are reminded yet again what kind of people they must scrape the bottom of the barrel to get.
Not just known-nothings, but fresh-out-of-school ones at that.
Sadly that scam has gone on for a generation.
What happens if they get into schools or colleges and start posing as staff or faculty?
?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30076594</id>
	<title>Re:they've been copying Mac all along...</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1258055160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>``Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple, after all.''</p><p>Well, why not? I don't see the big deal here. So Windows copied ideas from OS X.</p><p>OS X copied, like, the whole of Unix!</p><p>And Unix? Well, it copied ideas from MULTICS. And the GUI is probably inspired by the Mac's.</p><p>Really, copying ideas is nothing new in the OS biz, and it's a Good Thing there as it is everywhere else. Why reinvent the wheel? If a good idea is already out there, why not use it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>` ` Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple , after all .
''Well , why not ?
I do n't see the big deal here .
So Windows copied ideas from OS X.OS X copied , like , the whole of Unix ! And Unix ?
Well , it copied ideas from MULTICS .
And the GUI is probably inspired by the Mac 's.Really , copying ideas is nothing new in the OS biz , and it 's a Good Thing there as it is everywhere else .
Why reinvent the wheel ?
If a good idea is already out there , why not use it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>``Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple, after all.
''Well, why not?
I don't see the big deal here.
So Windows copied ideas from OS X.OS X copied, like, the whole of Unix!And Unix?
Well, it copied ideas from MULTICS.
And the GUI is probably inspired by the Mac's.Really, copying ideas is nothing new in the OS biz, and it's a Good Thing there as it is everywhere else.
Why reinvent the wheel?
If a good idea is already out there, why not use it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071912</id>
	<title>Someone got called out</title>
	<author>onyxruby</author>
	<datestamp>1258038000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So some clueless employee in a company of tens of thousands of employees made a comment on the record. If this was an employee on one of the design teams, and it was a comment in an email to their manager and said email leaked, there would be a story and a lawsuit. However it wasn't, it just happened to be conjecture by someone that pulled their comment out of their ass.</p><p>The employee should have known better to make such a comment to begin with and is likely now<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/very/ aware of Microsoft's press policy.</p><p>What the employee did was no different from a factory worker for Ford that spends their day driving new cars into the parking lot making a comment about the design inspiration for the F-150. To be frank, I'll be surprised if the employee doesn't get fired, they certainly have cause.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So some clueless employee in a company of tens of thousands of employees made a comment on the record .
If this was an employee on one of the design teams , and it was a comment in an email to their manager and said email leaked , there would be a story and a lawsuit .
However it was n't , it just happened to be conjecture by someone that pulled their comment out of their ass.The employee should have known better to make such a comment to begin with and is likely now /very/ aware of Microsoft 's press policy.What the employee did was no different from a factory worker for Ford that spends their day driving new cars into the parking lot making a comment about the design inspiration for the F-150 .
To be frank , I 'll be surprised if the employee does n't get fired , they certainly have cause .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So some clueless employee in a company of tens of thousands of employees made a comment on the record.
If this was an employee on one of the design teams, and it was a comment in an email to their manager and said email leaked, there would be a story and a lawsuit.
However it wasn't, it just happened to be conjecture by someone that pulled their comment out of their ass.The employee should have known better to make such a comment to begin with and is likely now /very/ aware of Microsoft's press policy.What the employee did was no different from a factory worker for Ford that spends their day driving new cars into the parking lot making a comment about the design inspiration for the F-150.
To be frank, I'll be surprised if the employee doesn't get fired, they certainly have cause.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073110</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>vosester</author>
	<datestamp>1258043220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In OS X press Ctrl + F2 to get to the menu-bar and if you want the Edit menu just type edit and if you want the File menu just type file and so on, when you want to go down a menu just press Enter and type what you need next, can be used like that on any menu in OS X. Think of it like a filter. Easy when you know how.</p><p>Makes a lot of sense when you think about it. Does not limit the amount of key combos that you can have compared to the Alt + Key way and you do not need to learn a sequence of keys but you can.<br>it is natural language, you don't have to look for the underscore, it always starts with the first letter, and most of us read left-to-right so it is natural.</p><p>At first OS X drove me bat shit crazy the way it works, but after reading the manuals and other users on how OS X work. I could not use another OS now for my desktop needs. I only needed a proprietary application for a couple of months for a job and after two months with OS X, I switch from Linux (8 years) to OS X and after stepping out of the FOSS world. OS X has showed me that Linux might have surpassed Windows years ago but its got a long way to go before it beats OS X in terms of usability.</p><p>Before you get mad at the way OS X work like I use to do. A bit of research and you find the reasoning for the way Apple dose things and their will be a moment when you think to yourself dam that is cleaver and f**k that makes a lot of sense.</p><p>And why the hell is no one else in the tech world doing what Apple dose. Love or hate Apple but credit where credit is due they think outside the view of the Windows/Gnome/XFCE/KDE crowed and I think its for the better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In OS X press Ctrl + F2 to get to the menu-bar and if you want the Edit menu just type edit and if you want the File menu just type file and so on , when you want to go down a menu just press Enter and type what you need next , can be used like that on any menu in OS X. Think of it like a filter .
Easy when you know how.Makes a lot of sense when you think about it .
Does not limit the amount of key combos that you can have compared to the Alt + Key way and you do not need to learn a sequence of keys but you can.it is natural language , you do n't have to look for the underscore , it always starts with the first letter , and most of us read left-to-right so it is natural.At first OS X drove me bat shit crazy the way it works , but after reading the manuals and other users on how OS X work .
I could not use another OS now for my desktop needs .
I only needed a proprietary application for a couple of months for a job and after two months with OS X , I switch from Linux ( 8 years ) to OS X and after stepping out of the FOSS world .
OS X has showed me that Linux might have surpassed Windows years ago but its got a long way to go before it beats OS X in terms of usability.Before you get mad at the way OS X work like I use to do .
A bit of research and you find the reasoning for the way Apple dose things and their will be a moment when you think to yourself dam that is cleaver and f * * k that makes a lot of sense.And why the hell is no one else in the tech world doing what Apple dose .
Love or hate Apple but credit where credit is due they think outside the view of the Windows/Gnome/XFCE/KDE crowed and I think its for the better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In OS X press Ctrl + F2 to get to the menu-bar and if you want the Edit menu just type edit and if you want the File menu just type file and so on, when you want to go down a menu just press Enter and type what you need next, can be used like that on any menu in OS X. Think of it like a filter.
Easy when you know how.Makes a lot of sense when you think about it.
Does not limit the amount of key combos that you can have compared to the Alt + Key way and you do not need to learn a sequence of keys but you can.it is natural language, you don't have to look for the underscore, it always starts with the first letter, and most of us read left-to-right so it is natural.At first OS X drove me bat shit crazy the way it works, but after reading the manuals and other users on how OS X work.
I could not use another OS now for my desktop needs.
I only needed a proprietary application for a couple of months for a job and after two months with OS X, I switch from Linux (8 years) to OS X and after stepping out of the FOSS world.
OS X has showed me that Linux might have surpassed Windows years ago but its got a long way to go before it beats OS X in terms of usability.Before you get mad at the way OS X work like I use to do.
A bit of research and you find the reasoning for the way Apple dose things and their will be a moment when you think to yourself dam that is cleaver and f**k that makes a lot of sense.And why the hell is no one else in the tech world doing what Apple dose.
Love or hate Apple but credit where credit is due they think outside the view of the Windows/Gnome/XFCE/KDE crowed and I think its for the better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404</id>
	<title>they've been copying Mac all along...</title>
	<author>wvmarle</author>
	<datestamp>1258034760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple's work! And maybe now and then from somewhere else. So I'm more inclined to believe the interviewed employee than the higher-up managers refuting it. Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple, after all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple 's work !
And maybe now and then from somewhere else .
So I 'm more inclined to believe the interviewed employee than the higher-up managers refuting it .
Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple's work!
And maybe now and then from somewhere else.
So I'm more inclined to believe the interviewed employee than the higher-up managers refuting it.
Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple, after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072310</id>
	<title>Nothing to see here</title>
	<author>BlortHorc</author>
	<datestamp>1258039980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh man, the number of times I've heard one of the BD/marketing guys spouting off about some shit he has only been paid to sell, not understand and I've thought, man, seriously hope no one he is talking to has a clue, because, really, if they do, we are going to look like dicks right now.</p><p>This shit happens a hundred times a day all over the world, BD/marketing guys spout shit, what we pay them for, apparently, just happens this time someone wrote it down where people who know better could see.</p><p>Nothing MS specific about this, except this particular waste of space happens to work for them. Or at least, he did<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh man , the number of times I 've heard one of the BD/marketing guys spouting off about some shit he has only been paid to sell , not understand and I 've thought , man , seriously hope no one he is talking to has a clue , because , really , if they do , we are going to look like dicks right now.This shit happens a hundred times a day all over the world , BD/marketing guys spout shit , what we pay them for , apparently , just happens this time someone wrote it down where people who know better could see.Nothing MS specific about this , except this particular waste of space happens to work for them .
Or at least , he did : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh man, the number of times I've heard one of the BD/marketing guys spouting off about some shit he has only been paid to sell, not understand and I've thought, man, seriously hope no one he is talking to has a clue, because, really, if they do, we are going to look like dicks right now.This shit happens a hundred times a day all over the world, BD/marketing guys spout shit, what we pay them for, apparently, just happens this time someone wrote it down where people who know better could see.Nothing MS specific about this, except this particular waste of space happens to work for them.
Or at least, he did :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071476</id>
	<title>If this is true...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258035300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Then they did a terrible job copying OSX.  Windows 7 is still clunky, slow, and unstable.  It's nothing like OSX at all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then they did a terrible job copying OSX .
Windows 7 is still clunky , slow , and unstable .
It 's nothing like OSX at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then they did a terrible job copying OSX.
Windows 7 is still clunky, slow, and unstable.
It's nothing like OSX at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071630</id>
	<title>I agree with MS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258036500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple still has a fraction of the virus, or the hassles that Windows 7 has. Heck, it would cost too much money for Windows to even approach OSX in ease or security. So at this time, MS simply is copying their earlier versions; more of the same.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple still has a fraction of the virus , or the hassles that Windows 7 has .
Heck , it would cost too much money for Windows to even approach OSX in ease or security .
So at this time , MS simply is copying their earlier versions ; more of the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple still has a fraction of the virus, or the hassles that Windows 7 has.
Heck, it would cost too much money for Windows to even approach OSX in ease or security.
So at this time, MS simply is copying their earlier versions; more of the same.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30080692</id>
	<title>Not a copy...</title>
	<author>stewbacca</author>
	<datestamp>1258026660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, because Aero is nothing like Aqua, and Gadgets are nothing like Widgets...shall I continue?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , because Aero is nothing like Aqua , and Gadgets are nothing like Widgets...shall I continue ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, because Aero is nothing like Aqua, and Gadgets are nothing like Widgets...shall I continue?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072094</id>
	<title>MS Innovations have never been about Design</title>
	<author>BlueBoxSW.com</author>
	<datestamp>1258039020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS innovations have always been in Marketing themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS innovations have always been in Marketing themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS innovations have always been in Marketing themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071814</id>
	<title>M$, You Stupid Fools</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258037640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Deny, deny, deny... it doesn't change the fact that M$ ripped most of its UI improvements directly from OS/X.  Imagine if someone did that to M$... you'd be sued into oblivion.  M$ you suck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Deny , deny , deny... it does n't change the fact that M $ ripped most of its UI improvements directly from OS/X .
Imagine if someone did that to M $ ... you 'd be sued into oblivion .
M $ you suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Deny, deny, deny... it doesn't change the fact that M$ ripped most of its UI improvements directly from OS/X.
Imagine if someone did that to M$... you'd be sued into oblivion.
M$ you suck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074206</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Jeff DeMaagd</author>
	<datestamp>1258048020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems that OS X is actually a little more consistent about what the hot keys mean.</p><p>If you want to control what the menu hot keys are, you can add/change them in the Keyboard Preferences, by app or globally across all apps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems that OS X is actually a little more consistent about what the hot keys mean.If you want to control what the menu hot keys are , you can add/change them in the Keyboard Preferences , by app or globally across all apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems that OS X is actually a little more consistent about what the hot keys mean.If you want to control what the menu hot keys are, you can add/change them in the Keyboard Preferences, by app or globally across all apps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30082844</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>yanos</author>
	<datestamp>1258041060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh my god. I just tried it now. I didn't know about cmd-`<br> <br>
Thanks for the tips bro!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh my god .
I just tried it now .
I did n't know about cmd- ` Thanks for the tips bro !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh my god.
I just tried it now.
I didn't know about cmd-` 
Thanks for the tips bro!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071534</id>
	<title>Should've named it Vista7 or Vista-II instead..</title>
	<author>jkrise</author>
	<datestamp>1258035840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Weve taken everything thats good about Vista, along with the core infrastructure of the operating system, and weve made it faster and slimmed down the code to make it more effective.</p><p>Weve also tried to listen to what customers want in terms of a much slicker user interface and the ability to engage with it far more intuitively. Thats the product that were delivering.</p> </div><p>Why are the reviews saying 7 is completely different to Vista, and will be a success? I can only see more  disaster for MS. I checked with a few retail outlets in India; and the feedback is that customers are removing 7 andloading Pirated XP instead. I feel this means Corporates will 'up'grade 7  to XP for the time being then.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Weve taken everything thats good about Vista , along with the core infrastructure of the operating system , and weve made it faster and slimmed down the code to make it more effective.Weve also tried to listen to what customers want in terms of a much slicker user interface and the ability to engage with it far more intuitively .
Thats the product that were delivering .
Why are the reviews saying 7 is completely different to Vista , and will be a success ?
I can only see more disaster for MS. I checked with a few retail outlets in India ; and the feedback is that customers are removing 7 andloading Pirated XP instead .
I feel this means Corporates will 'up'grade 7 to XP for the time being then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Weve taken everything thats good about Vista, along with the core infrastructure of the operating system, and weve made it faster and slimmed down the code to make it more effective.Weve also tried to listen to what customers want in terms of a much slicker user interface and the ability to engage with it far more intuitively.
Thats the product that were delivering.
Why are the reviews saying 7 is completely different to Vista, and will be a success?
I can only see more  disaster for MS. I checked with a few retail outlets in India; and the feedback is that customers are removing 7 andloading Pirated XP instead.
I feel this means Corporates will 'up'grade 7  to XP for the time being then.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410</id>
	<title>Things not to do if you like your job</title>
	<author>Random5</author>
	<datestamp>1258034820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pretty sure on the list of 'Things not to do if you like your job', admitting you're inspired by the competition and complimenting their design TO THE PRESS has got to be in the top 3.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty sure on the list of 'Things not to do if you like your job ' , admitting you 're inspired by the competition and complimenting their design TO THE PRESS has got to be in the top 3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty sure on the list of 'Things not to do if you like your job', admitting you're inspired by the competition and complimenting their design TO THE PRESS has got to be in the top 3.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071632</id>
	<title>Bad Analogy (courtesy MS)</title>
	<author>smitty777</author>
	<datestamp>1258036500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTA: <i>"When the sun is shining there&rsquo;s no incentive to change the roof on your house. It&rsquo;s only when its raining that you realise there&rsquo;s a problem." </i></p><p>Ahem....um...so I guess by rain, you mean some sort of Katrina like attention getter?  Sheesh...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTA : " When the sun is shining there    s no incentive to change the roof on your house .
It    s only when its raining that you realise there    s a problem .
" Ahem....um...so I guess by rain , you mean some sort of Katrina like attention getter ?
Sheesh.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTA: "When the sun is shining there’s no incentive to change the roof on your house.
It’s only when its raining that you realise there’s a problem.
" Ahem....um...so I guess by rain, you mean some sort of Katrina like attention getter?
Sheesh...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074148</id>
	<title>To troll or not to troll</title>
	<author>flyneye</author>
	<datestamp>1258047840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(giggles) No! I cant go through with it. My karma is too good right now to inject the obvious hilarious remarks about Windows and Mac. Just watching you guys carrying on is funny enough right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( giggles ) No !
I cant go through with it .
My karma is too good right now to inject the obvious hilarious remarks about Windows and Mac .
Just watching you guys carrying on is funny enough right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(giggles) No!
I cant go through with it.
My karma is too good right now to inject the obvious hilarious remarks about Windows and Mac.
Just watching you guys carrying on is funny enough right now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075628</id>
	<title>Alt-Keys Navigation Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258052100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What really drove me nuts is when MS started hiding the alt-key indicator by default. Was the little underline in the menu really in anyones way? Why should I have to hold down Alt to 'discover' if there is a keyboard navigation for a particular menu?</p><p>What I will also admit some frustration with, is that although i love the feature, it can be annoying when different applications use different keys to access commonly named menu items.</p><p>Not a better key, just a different one. Firefox why are bookmark properties changed from 'r' to 'i'???</p><p>However, far and away I'd rather deal with the idiosyncratic use of the option, than not have it at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What really drove me nuts is when MS started hiding the alt-key indicator by default .
Was the little underline in the menu really in anyones way ?
Why should I have to hold down Alt to 'discover ' if there is a keyboard navigation for a particular menu ? What I will also admit some frustration with , is that although i love the feature , it can be annoying when different applications use different keys to access commonly named menu items.Not a better key , just a different one .
Firefox why are bookmark properties changed from 'r ' to 'i ' ? ?
? However , far and away I 'd rather deal with the idiosyncratic use of the option , than not have it at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What really drove me nuts is when MS started hiding the alt-key indicator by default.
Was the little underline in the menu really in anyones way?
Why should I have to hold down Alt to 'discover' if there is a keyboard navigation for a particular menu?What I will also admit some frustration with, is that although i love the feature, it can be annoying when different applications use different keys to access commonly named menu items.Not a better key, just a different one.
Firefox why are bookmark properties changed from 'r' to 'i'??
?However, far and away I'd rather deal with the idiosyncratic use of the option, than not have it at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071556</id>
	<title>Linux users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258035960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are butt hurt that they cant<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null their<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/fstab</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are butt hurt that they cant /dev/null their /etc/fstab</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are butt hurt that they cant /dev/null their /etc/fstab</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074482</id>
	<title>Ok, well, let's look</title>
	<author>mario\_grgic</author>
	<datestamp>1258048920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Taksbar now looks like dock did in Tiger 4 years ago.</p><p>Windows have drop shadow, like they do in OS X for a long time now.</p><p>Aero peek and aero flip 3d are rip off of expose.</p><p>Windows search is still not as fast, extensive and as Spotlight is in OS X.</p><p>So, yes, they have tried to re-implement OS X features, but as as all things Microsoft, they lack polish and taste<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D. User experience is still noticeably not as good or as refined as in OS X, I doubt is can ever be without simplifying things at the OS core.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Taksbar now looks like dock did in Tiger 4 years ago.Windows have drop shadow , like they do in OS X for a long time now.Aero peek and aero flip 3d are rip off of expose.Windows search is still not as fast , extensive and as Spotlight is in OS X.So , yes , they have tried to re-implement OS X features , but as as all things Microsoft , they lack polish and taste : D. User experience is still noticeably not as good or as refined as in OS X , I doubt is can ever be without simplifying things at the OS core .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Taksbar now looks like dock did in Tiger 4 years ago.Windows have drop shadow, like they do in OS X for a long time now.Aero peek and aero flip 3d are rip off of expose.Windows search is still not as fast, extensive and as Spotlight is in OS X.So, yes, they have tried to re-implement OS X features, but as as all things Microsoft, they lack polish and taste :D. User experience is still noticeably not as good or as refined as in OS X, I doubt is can ever be without simplifying things at the OS core.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071646</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>joh</author>
	<datestamp>1258036680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What I want is to be able to access a menu list from the keyboard quickly while exploring, not remember various different short cuts.</p></div></blockquote><p>This is Control-F2 on OS X. This selects the menu and allows to browse it with the cursor keys.</p><p>Alt+character has always been the way to type various special characters and ligatures on the Mac. Wasting this for another way to access menu entries instead was never an option for an OS that grew up with DTP.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I want is to be able to access a menu list from the keyboard quickly while exploring , not remember various different short cuts.This is Control-F2 on OS X. This selects the menu and allows to browse it with the cursor keys.Alt + character has always been the way to type various special characters and ligatures on the Mac .
Wasting this for another way to access menu entries instead was never an option for an OS that grew up with DTP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I want is to be able to access a menu list from the keyboard quickly while exploring, not remember various different short cuts.This is Control-F2 on OS X. This selects the menu and allows to browse it with the cursor keys.Alt+character has always been the way to type various special characters and ligatures on the Mac.
Wasting this for another way to access menu entries instead was never an option for an OS that grew up with DTP.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073020</id>
	<title>the future...</title>
	<author>Drasham</author>
	<datestamp>1258042860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I often wonder at what point the fans of both sides will stop and realize that both OSas are convergently evolving?
  We can all see how both OSs have slowly been drawing closer and closer together.


Additionally, where do you draw the line between a company's "property" and a "good idea"?
  Both OSs use a window driven interface, both have close and minimize buttons, both use a mouse, et cetera...


Heck, even Linux OSs have a window's-ish GUI.


"Can't we all just get along?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>I often wonder at what point the fans of both sides will stop and realize that both OSas are convergently evolving ?
We can all see how both OSs have slowly been drawing closer and closer together .
Additionally , where do you draw the line between a company 's " property " and a " good idea " ?
Both OSs use a window driven interface , both have close and minimize buttons , both use a mouse , et cetera.. . Heck , even Linux OSs have a window 's-ish GUI .
" Ca n't we all just get along ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I often wonder at what point the fans of both sides will stop and realize that both OSas are convergently evolving?
We can all see how both OSs have slowly been drawing closer and closer together.
Additionally, where do you draw the line between a company's "property" and a "good idea"?
Both OSs use a window driven interface, both have close and minimize buttons, both use a mouse, et cetera...


Heck, even Linux OSs have a window's-ish GUI.
"Can't we all just get along?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073608</id>
	<title>Blue Steel... Ferrari? Le Tigra?</title>
	<author>slagdemon</author>
	<datestamp>1258045320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're the same face! Doesn't anybody notice this? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're the same face !
Does n't anybody notice this ?
I feel like I 'm taking crazy pills !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're the same face!
Doesn't anybody notice this?
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073558</id>
	<title>Re:Things not to do if you like your job</title>
	<author>flabordec</author>
	<datestamp>1258045140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>As long as it is inspiration and not copying, I would think it is OK. It takes a special kind of man to admit someone is doing something better than him and that he is trying to be more like him.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as it is inspiration and not copying , I would think it is OK. It takes a special kind of man to admit someone is doing something better than him and that he is trying to be more like him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as it is inspiration and not copying, I would think it is OK. It takes a special kind of man to admit someone is doing something better than him and that he is trying to be more like him.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30076116</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258053660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm in a window. I want to switch to a different window that might be in the same app and might be in a different app, without leaving the K/B. How?</p><p>Typical scenario: I have two or three terminal windows open, debugging a webserver that's misconfigured. I have this terminal window somewhere in docroot, editing a temporary HTML file that I'm using to diagnose the problem. I have another terminal window editing httpd.conf, and being used to restart Apache. I have a browser window or two to see if I got it right, yet.</p><p>I can switch from the terminal window to the browser window without much trouble, but I can't easily switch to the other terminal window!</p><p>There's the Alt-Tab combination, but that switches between different *applications*. I can jigger the mouse into a corner, and see all windows on all workspaces, but that requires using the mouse - easier to click on the window with the mouse directly.</p><p>There's no way to do this that I've been able to find, but if you know it, I'd sure like to know... As a LONG time KDE user, I LOVE Compiz effect's alt-tab combination that not only lets me scroll thru the windows, but provides a nice "stacked" interface for letting me see what I'm switching to!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm in a window .
I want to switch to a different window that might be in the same app and might be in a different app , without leaving the K/B .
How ? Typical scenario : I have two or three terminal windows open , debugging a webserver that 's misconfigured .
I have this terminal window somewhere in docroot , editing a temporary HTML file that I 'm using to diagnose the problem .
I have another terminal window editing httpd.conf , and being used to restart Apache .
I have a browser window or two to see if I got it right , yet.I can switch from the terminal window to the browser window without much trouble , but I ca n't easily switch to the other terminal window ! There 's the Alt-Tab combination , but that switches between different * applications * .
I can jigger the mouse into a corner , and see all windows on all workspaces , but that requires using the mouse - easier to click on the window with the mouse directly.There 's no way to do this that I 've been able to find , but if you know it , I 'd sure like to know... As a LONG time KDE user , I LOVE Compiz effect 's alt-tab combination that not only lets me scroll thru the windows , but provides a nice " stacked " interface for letting me see what I 'm switching to !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm in a window.
I want to switch to a different window that might be in the same app and might be in a different app, without leaving the K/B.
How?Typical scenario: I have two or three terminal windows open, debugging a webserver that's misconfigured.
I have this terminal window somewhere in docroot, editing a temporary HTML file that I'm using to diagnose the problem.
I have another terminal window editing httpd.conf, and being used to restart Apache.
I have a browser window or two to see if I got it right, yet.I can switch from the terminal window to the browser window without much trouble, but I can't easily switch to the other terminal window!There's the Alt-Tab combination, but that switches between different *applications*.
I can jigger the mouse into a corner, and see all windows on all workspaces, but that requires using the mouse - easier to click on the window with the mouse directly.There's no way to do this that I've been able to find, but if you know it, I'd sure like to know... As a LONG time KDE user, I LOVE Compiz effect's alt-tab combination that not only lets me scroll thru the windows, but provides a nice "stacked" interface for letting me see what I'm switching to!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072342</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258040100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>For the last time... The meme is  OMGWTFBBQ!!!!!1!!!eleventy-one!!!

Note that 'WTF' there in the center.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the last time... The meme is OMGWTFBBQ ! ! ! ! ! 1 ! ! ! eleventy-one ! ! !
Note that 'WTF ' there in the center .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the last time... The meme is  OMGWTFBBQ!!!!!1!!!eleventy-one!!!
Note that 'WTF' there in the center.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30084010</id>
	<title>News flash, this just in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258053480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Police today found the mutilated body of a yet unnamed Microsoft employee, who was apparently beaten to death with a folding chair.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Police today found the mutilated body of a yet unnamed Microsoft employee , who was apparently beaten to death with a folding chair .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Police today found the mutilated body of a yet unnamed Microsoft employee, who was apparently beaten to death with a folding chair.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074626</id>
	<title>Re:Things not to do if you like your job</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1258049460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, but so does <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/news/1999/0924ouch.html" title="networkworld.com">Publicly stating that your company's stock is overvalued</a> [networkworld.com], and 10 years later Ballmer still has his job! (In both cases, the fact that they were speaking the truth is no defense -- they have a fiduciary responsibility to the company they work for to not damage it's market value.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but so does Publicly stating that your company 's stock is overvalued [ networkworld.com ] , and 10 years later Ballmer still has his job !
( In both cases , the fact that they were speaking the truth is no defense -- they have a fiduciary responsibility to the company they work for to not damage it 's market value .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but so does Publicly stating that your company's stock is overvalued [networkworld.com], and 10 years later Ballmer still has his job!
(In both cases, the fact that they were speaking the truth is no defense -- they have a fiduciary responsibility to the company they work for to not damage it's market value.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30084402</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1258145640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In Windows I can hit the Alt key, and quickly see all the menus I can open by using an other key (the letter used for the menu item will have an underscore). Such as Alt + F is the file menu.</p></div></blockquote><p>It was good while it lasted but for nearly the last decade that part of the interface is not even consistent in the Office product.  Alt + F + X used to get you out of any MS GUI program as well as many others that would work the same across products - now all the alt combination is useful for is to bring up the menu so you can click on the correct thing unless you have lived every day for months in the one application.  It's all just a twisty maze of menus with decreasing usability with every release.<br>Many of my MS Windows users refuse to run anything unless there is a desktop icon for it.  The bizzare morphing behaviour of the START menu scares them.  These are people that have used the MS Windows platform for more than twenty hours a week for a decade and still want their Win98 interface back.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Windows I can hit the Alt key , and quickly see all the menus I can open by using an other key ( the letter used for the menu item will have an underscore ) .
Such as Alt + F is the file menu.It was good while it lasted but for nearly the last decade that part of the interface is not even consistent in the Office product .
Alt + F + X used to get you out of any MS GUI program as well as many others that would work the same across products - now all the alt combination is useful for is to bring up the menu so you can click on the correct thing unless you have lived every day for months in the one application .
It 's all just a twisty maze of menus with decreasing usability with every release.Many of my MS Windows users refuse to run anything unless there is a desktop icon for it .
The bizzare morphing behaviour of the START menu scares them .
These are people that have used the MS Windows platform for more than twenty hours a week for a decade and still want their Win98 interface back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Windows I can hit the Alt key, and quickly see all the menus I can open by using an other key (the letter used for the menu item will have an underscore).
Such as Alt + F is the file menu.It was good while it lasted but for nearly the last decade that part of the interface is not even consistent in the Office product.
Alt + F + X used to get you out of any MS GUI program as well as many others that would work the same across products - now all the alt combination is useful for is to bring up the menu so you can click on the correct thing unless you have lived every day for months in the one application.
It's all just a twisty maze of menus with decreasing usability with every release.Many of my MS Windows users refuse to run anything unless there is a desktop icon for it.
The bizzare morphing behaviour of the START menu scares them.
These are people that have used the MS Windows platform for more than twenty hours a week for a decade and still want their Win98 interface back.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073726</id>
	<title>Re:Things not to do if you like your job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258045920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my defense, that mop was a slut</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my defense , that mop was a slut</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my defense, that mop was a slut</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072106</id>
	<title>Quick, name one technology...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258039080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Besides the EULA that Microsoft actually invented.  Serious question, not trolling.  What new technology, not just old tech with a new name, has Microsoft actually invented?  To me it seems that their contribution to the software is the EULA, not the underlying tech itself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides the EULA that Microsoft actually invented .
Serious question , not trolling .
What new technology , not just old tech with a new name , has Microsoft actually invented ?
To me it seems that their contribution to the software is the EULA , not the underlying tech itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides the EULA that Microsoft actually invented.
Serious question, not trolling.
What new technology, not just old tech with a new name, has Microsoft actually invented?
To me it seems that their contribution to the software is the EULA, not the underlying tech itself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074876</id>
	<title>Re:they've been copying Mac all along...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258050060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple's work! And maybe now and then from somewhere else. So I'm more inclined to believe the interviewed employee than the higher-up managers refuting it. Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple, after all.</p></div><p>I too could be more inclined to believe the employee over higher-up managers refuting it, <i>if</i> the employee was someone that looked like he could have had the slightest involvment with the planning and development of Windows 7 and not being a partner manager (read sales person) on the other side of the ocean.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple 's work !
And maybe now and then from somewhere else .
So I 'm more inclined to believe the interviewed employee than the higher-up managers refuting it .
Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple , after all.I too could be more inclined to believe the employee over higher-up managers refuting it , if the employee was someone that looked like he could have had the slightest involvment with the planning and development of Windows 7 and not being a partner manager ( read sales person ) on the other side of the ocean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple's work!
And maybe now and then from somewhere else.
So I'm more inclined to believe the interviewed employee than the higher-up managers refuting it.
Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple, after all.I too could be more inclined to believe the employee over higher-up managers refuting it, if the employee was someone that looked like he could have had the slightest involvment with the planning and development of Windows 7 and not being a partner manager (read sales person) on the other side of the ocean.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071506</id>
	<title>Ideas don't occur in a vacuum</title>
	<author>Interoperable</author>
	<datestamp>1258035660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple has a lot of good ideas that Windows and Linux copy. Likewise, Windows and Linux generate a lot of good ideas that the other two copy. It's not surprising that Windows is mimicking some OSX features (and it obviously is). It would just be nice if Microsoft and Apple stopped getting patents on every damned thing (sudo) and acknowledged that other can have good ideas. Personally, I think Windows would do better to take pages from the KDE book, but maybe that's just personal taste.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple has a lot of good ideas that Windows and Linux copy .
Likewise , Windows and Linux generate a lot of good ideas that the other two copy .
It 's not surprising that Windows is mimicking some OSX features ( and it obviously is ) .
It would just be nice if Microsoft and Apple stopped getting patents on every damned thing ( sudo ) and acknowledged that other can have good ideas .
Personally , I think Windows would do better to take pages from the KDE book , but maybe that 's just personal taste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple has a lot of good ideas that Windows and Linux copy.
Likewise, Windows and Linux generate a lot of good ideas that the other two copy.
It's not surprising that Windows is mimicking some OSX features (and it obviously is).
It would just be nice if Microsoft and Apple stopped getting patents on every damned thing (sudo) and acknowledged that other can have good ideas.
Personally, I think Windows would do better to take pages from the KDE book, but maybe that's just personal taste.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474</id>
	<title>Hello Streisand</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258035300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, considering that I had no idea what that guy said until I read it here, I'd say MS is putting more fuel on the fire by saying that.  Would it have ended up on slashdot even if MS hadn't issued the denial?  Maybe, but by denying it, it ensured it ended up on slashdot.  In any case, this guy has the title, "partner group manager" which sounds like not only is he a manager but, suspiciously, in marketing too.  It is funny though that MS <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1302679&amp;cid=28703059" title="slashdot.org">periodically has these guys go off the reservation</a> [slashdot.org] and start spouting not tactful, but perhaps true comments.<br> <br>But anyway, considering that Apple has put a huge amount of effort into streamlining their OS and making it more responsive to the user, just in general I think that's a good thing to emulate in your OS.  For example, I can remember waiting on 10.0 and 10.1 for what seemed like eternities for the spinning beach ball to quit but that's gotten a lot better with recent releases. (Don't get me started on if you were trying to log onto an ftp server that wasn't responding.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , considering that I had no idea what that guy said until I read it here , I 'd say MS is putting more fuel on the fire by saying that .
Would it have ended up on slashdot even if MS had n't issued the denial ?
Maybe , but by denying it , it ensured it ended up on slashdot .
In any case , this guy has the title , " partner group manager " which sounds like not only is he a manager but , suspiciously , in marketing too .
It is funny though that MS periodically has these guys go off the reservation [ slashdot.org ] and start spouting not tactful , but perhaps true comments .
But anyway , considering that Apple has put a huge amount of effort into streamlining their OS and making it more responsive to the user , just in general I think that 's a good thing to emulate in your OS .
For example , I can remember waiting on 10.0 and 10.1 for what seemed like eternities for the spinning beach ball to quit but that 's gotten a lot better with recent releases .
( Do n't get me started on if you were trying to log onto an ftp server that was n't responding .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, considering that I had no idea what that guy said until I read it here, I'd say MS is putting more fuel on the fire by saying that.
Would it have ended up on slashdot even if MS hadn't issued the denial?
Maybe, but by denying it, it ensured it ended up on slashdot.
In any case, this guy has the title, "partner group manager" which sounds like not only is he a manager but, suspiciously, in marketing too.
It is funny though that MS periodically has these guys go off the reservation [slashdot.org] and start spouting not tactful, but perhaps true comments.
But anyway, considering that Apple has put a huge amount of effort into streamlining their OS and making it more responsive to the user, just in general I think that's a good thing to emulate in your OS.
For example, I can remember waiting on 10.0 and 10.1 for what seemed like eternities for the spinning beach ball to quit but that's gotten a lot better with recent releases.
(Don't get me started on if you were trying to log onto an ftp server that wasn't responding.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071714</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>jordibares</author>
	<datestamp>1258037160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IMHO it is a cultural difference, not a user interface difference, not a graphical interface difference, and sure not aesthetics driven. A bit more like talking about user behaviour design vs. graphical design, this is years of innovation on Apple's side that Microsoft has not grasped yet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IMHO it is a cultural difference , not a user interface difference , not a graphical interface difference , and sure not aesthetics driven .
A bit more like talking about user behaviour design vs. graphical design , this is years of innovation on Apple 's side that Microsoft has not grasped yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMHO it is a cultural difference, not a user interface difference, not a graphical interface difference, and sure not aesthetics driven.
A bit more like talking about user behaviour design vs. graphical design, this is years of innovation on Apple's side that Microsoft has not grasped yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072714</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>xtracto</author>
	<datestamp>1258041720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>OMGBBQ!!!!! Gnome is bettar than both!!!!!</p></div><p>Now, I agree that Gnome is better than Vi; however you an not sincerely believe that a lousy desktop environment is better than a complete operating system (that is only lacking a good text editor).<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>OMGBBQ ! ! ! ! !
Gnome is bettar than both ! ! ! !
! Now , I agree that Gnome is better than Vi ; however you an not sincerely believe that a lousy desktop environment is better than a complete operating system ( that is only lacking a good text editor ) .
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OMGBBQ!!!!!
Gnome is bettar than both!!!!
!Now, I agree that Gnome is better than Vi; however you an not sincerely believe that a lousy desktop environment is better than a complete operating system (that is only lacking a good text editor).
;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30083184</id>
	<title>Re:Ok, well, let's look</title>
	<author>daver00</author>
	<datestamp>1258043700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Taksbar now looks like dock did in Tiger 4 years ago.</p><p>Windows have drop shadow, like they do in OS X for a long time now.</p></div></blockquote><p>These are fairly petty complaints. I have two cars and both have steering wheels in front of me, with climate control panels in the middle, gear shifters in the middle, and peddles under the steering wheel. What. The. Fuck?</p><blockquote><div><p>Aero peek and aero flip 3d are rip off of expose.</p></div></blockquote><p>Flip 3d sort of tries to do what expose does, but you could hardly call it a ripoff, and it sucks balls and nobody uses it. Whoop dee do, a fancy animated way to do alt-tab, how innovative and original of both mac and windows. Aero peek on the other hand is not even remotely close to expose, and is a very good, very useful idea in its own right. It is more of a taskbar functionality.</p><blockquote><div><p>Windows search is still not as fast, extensive and as Spotlight is in OS X.</p></div></blockquote><p>Instant results is pretty fast? Extensive? It is 100\% customizable, it can be as extensive as I tell it to be.</p><blockquote><div><p>So, yes, they have tried to re-implement OS X features, but as as all things Microsoft, they lack polish and taste<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D. User experience is still noticeably not as good or as refined as in OS X, I doubt is can ever be without simplifying things at the OS core.</p></div></blockquote><p>7 is easily as polished as OSX, and looks better imo, but that is opinion. OSX usability is overrated, again, my opinion, but I'm trying to point out here that each one of your arguments is purely opinion based. I find parts of the UI in OSX completely clumsy and counter intuitive, but thats me. I don't want lord Jobs telling me how to use a computer, especially when he and I appear to disagree on how that should be. I actually find that windows does what you are claiming OSX does far more than OSX: it gets out of your way. Everything in OSX seems to be about forcing you to 'experience' the OS, it always feels like the OS is meddling with whatever you are doing. There is no clear distinction between OS UI and App UI, they are hopelessly intermingled in a senseless and abstract way. Personally, I hate it. I'm not a fan of windows, I just appreciate that it lets me set it up how I like and then just gets out of my way, thus I use it for my day to day chores, I use linux where it makes sense to, and using mac just doesn't makes sense so I don't.</p><p>Now we disagree, isn't that nice?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Taksbar now looks like dock did in Tiger 4 years ago.Windows have drop shadow , like they do in OS X for a long time now.These are fairly petty complaints .
I have two cars and both have steering wheels in front of me , with climate control panels in the middle , gear shifters in the middle , and peddles under the steering wheel .
What. The .
Fuck ? Aero peek and aero flip 3d are rip off of expose.Flip 3d sort of tries to do what expose does , but you could hardly call it a ripoff , and it sucks balls and nobody uses it .
Whoop dee do , a fancy animated way to do alt-tab , how innovative and original of both mac and windows .
Aero peek on the other hand is not even remotely close to expose , and is a very good , very useful idea in its own right .
It is more of a taskbar functionality.Windows search is still not as fast , extensive and as Spotlight is in OS X.Instant results is pretty fast ?
Extensive ? It is 100 \ % customizable , it can be as extensive as I tell it to be.So , yes , they have tried to re-implement OS X features , but as as all things Microsoft , they lack polish and taste : D. User experience is still noticeably not as good or as refined as in OS X , I doubt is can ever be without simplifying things at the OS core.7 is easily as polished as OSX , and looks better imo , but that is opinion .
OSX usability is overrated , again , my opinion , but I 'm trying to point out here that each one of your arguments is purely opinion based .
I find parts of the UI in OSX completely clumsy and counter intuitive , but thats me .
I do n't want lord Jobs telling me how to use a computer , especially when he and I appear to disagree on how that should be .
I actually find that windows does what you are claiming OSX does far more than OSX : it gets out of your way .
Everything in OSX seems to be about forcing you to 'experience ' the OS , it always feels like the OS is meddling with whatever you are doing .
There is no clear distinction between OS UI and App UI , they are hopelessly intermingled in a senseless and abstract way .
Personally , I hate it .
I 'm not a fan of windows , I just appreciate that it lets me set it up how I like and then just gets out of my way , thus I use it for my day to day chores , I use linux where it makes sense to , and using mac just does n't makes sense so I do n't.Now we disagree , is n't that nice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Taksbar now looks like dock did in Tiger 4 years ago.Windows have drop shadow, like they do in OS X for a long time now.These are fairly petty complaints.
I have two cars and both have steering wheels in front of me, with climate control panels in the middle, gear shifters in the middle, and peddles under the steering wheel.
What. The.
Fuck?Aero peek and aero flip 3d are rip off of expose.Flip 3d sort of tries to do what expose does, but you could hardly call it a ripoff, and it sucks balls and nobody uses it.
Whoop dee do, a fancy animated way to do alt-tab, how innovative and original of both mac and windows.
Aero peek on the other hand is not even remotely close to expose, and is a very good, very useful idea in its own right.
It is more of a taskbar functionality.Windows search is still not as fast, extensive and as Spotlight is in OS X.Instant results is pretty fast?
Extensive? It is 100\% customizable, it can be as extensive as I tell it to be.So, yes, they have tried to re-implement OS X features, but as as all things Microsoft, they lack polish and taste :D. User experience is still noticeably not as good or as refined as in OS X, I doubt is can ever be without simplifying things at the OS core.7 is easily as polished as OSX, and looks better imo, but that is opinion.
OSX usability is overrated, again, my opinion, but I'm trying to point out here that each one of your arguments is purely opinion based.
I find parts of the UI in OSX completely clumsy and counter intuitive, but thats me.
I don't want lord Jobs telling me how to use a computer, especially when he and I appear to disagree on how that should be.
I actually find that windows does what you are claiming OSX does far more than OSX: it gets out of your way.
Everything in OSX seems to be about forcing you to 'experience' the OS, it always feels like the OS is meddling with whatever you are doing.
There is no clear distinction between OS UI and App UI, they are hopelessly intermingled in a senseless and abstract way.
Personally, I hate it.
I'm not a fan of windows, I just appreciate that it lets me set it up how I like and then just gets out of my way, thus I use it for my day to day chores, I use linux where it makes sense to, and using mac just doesn't makes sense so I don't.Now we disagree, isn't that nice?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071812</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258037640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Windows' interface is flexible but clumsy. While this has gotten much better in later versions, we're still looking at deeply nested menus, and applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.</p></div><p>Please, please do not try to hang "applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other" on Windows alone.</p><p>Any GUI operating system that allows skinning of applications, whether by design, or by sheer bloodyminded overriding of low-level user interface drawing routines, will eventually have this problem as soon as some programmer decides that he doesn't like the "standard, boring, old window style" and he then proceeds to inflict his new "vision" of what the interface should look like on the user.</p><p>Then you wind up with non-rectangular windows in garish colors of the programmer's choosing with buttons that don't look like buttons, no visible menu bar, and few, if any, of the features users are used to seeing in their application windows.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows ' interface is flexible but clumsy .
While this has gotten much better in later versions , we 're still looking at deeply nested menus , and applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.Please , please do not try to hang " applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other " on Windows alone.Any GUI operating system that allows skinning of applications , whether by design , or by sheer bloodyminded overriding of low-level user interface drawing routines , will eventually have this problem as soon as some programmer decides that he does n't like the " standard , boring , old window style " and he then proceeds to inflict his new " vision " of what the interface should look like on the user.Then you wind up with non-rectangular windows in garish colors of the programmer 's choosing with buttons that do n't look like buttons , no visible menu bar , and few , if any , of the features users are used to seeing in their application windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows' interface is flexible but clumsy.
While this has gotten much better in later versions, we're still looking at deeply nested menus, and applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.Please, please do not try to hang "applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other" on Windows alone.Any GUI operating system that allows skinning of applications, whether by design, or by sheer bloodyminded overriding of low-level user interface drawing routines, will eventually have this problem as soon as some programmer decides that he doesn't like the "standard, boring, old window style" and he then proceeds to inflict his new "vision" of what the interface should look like on the user.Then you wind up with non-rectangular windows in garish colors of the programmer's choosing with buttons that don't look like buttons, no visible menu bar, and few, if any, of the features users are used to seeing in their application windows.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071972</id>
	<title>Re:Should've named it Vista7 or Vista-II instead..</title>
	<author>Truekaiser</author>
	<datestamp>1258038300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the place i work for has been doing that for years. either with vista or with the new machines coming with 7.</p><p>Also i have heard microsoft is allot more careful who they give review copy's of 7 out to now, looks like they desperately want it to be a success that they will make sure all the reviews are positive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the place i work for has been doing that for years .
either with vista or with the new machines coming with 7.Also i have heard microsoft is allot more careful who they give review copy 's of 7 out to now , looks like they desperately want it to be a success that they will make sure all the reviews are positive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the place i work for has been doing that for years.
either with vista or with the new machines coming with 7.Also i have heard microsoft is allot more careful who they give review copy's of 7 out to now, looks like they desperately want it to be a success that they will make sure all the reviews are positive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081970</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Killer Eye</author>
	<datestamp>1258033620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You speak of how you want to explore the menu. On OS X that's absolutely wrong. If you have to explore the menu to find something, then someone screwed up.</p></div></blockquote><p>Few users seem to realize that the Help menu (as of Leopard at least) has full search of all menu items.  You can literally type command-? to open the text field, and start typing to have it find matching items.  It is actually incredibly easy to "explore" menus on the Mac now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You speak of how you want to explore the menu .
On OS X that 's absolutely wrong .
If you have to explore the menu to find something , then someone screwed up.Few users seem to realize that the Help menu ( as of Leopard at least ) has full search of all menu items .
You can literally type command- ?
to open the text field , and start typing to have it find matching items .
It is actually incredibly easy to " explore " menus on the Mac now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You speak of how you want to explore the menu.
On OS X that's absolutely wrong.
If you have to explore the menu to find something, then someone screwed up.Few users seem to realize that the Help menu (as of Leopard at least) has full search of all menu items.
You can literally type command-?
to open the text field, and start typing to have it find matching items.
It is actually incredibly easy to "explore" menus on the Mac now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072826</id>
	<title>Re:Hello Streisand</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258042140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's to say the "leak" wasn't part of the plan from the start?</p><p>The public: Poo in a fishbowl, Vista is horrible.<br>Microsoft(1): Windows is now kind of more like the things you like in Mac.<br>Microsoft(2): WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE EVERYONE AWARE OF THE UNTRUTHS AND BASELESS ALLEGATIONS MADE AGAINST US WHICH WE WILL FIGHT VIGOROUSLY SHOULD THEY ENTER A COURT.<br>Microsoft(1): Do you think they bought it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's to say the " leak " was n't part of the plan from the start ? The public : Poo in a fishbowl , Vista is horrible.Microsoft ( 1 ) : Windows is now kind of more like the things you like in Mac.Microsoft ( 2 ) : WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE EVERYONE AWARE OF THE UNTRUTHS AND BASELESS ALLEGATIONS MADE AGAINST US WHICH WE WILL FIGHT VIGOROUSLY SHOULD THEY ENTER A COURT.Microsoft ( 1 ) : Do you think they bought it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's to say the "leak" wasn't part of the plan from the start?The public: Poo in a fishbowl, Vista is horrible.Microsoft(1): Windows is now kind of more like the things you like in Mac.Microsoft(2): WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE EVERYONE AWARE OF THE UNTRUTHS AND BASELESS ALLEGATIONS MADE AGAINST US WHICH WE WILL FIGHT VIGOROUSLY SHOULD THEY ENTER A COURT.Microsoft(1): Do you think they bought it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071578</id>
	<title>Paging Mr. Balmer</title>
	<author>m0s3m8n</author>
	<datestamp>1258036140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the MS intercom system... "Paging Mr. Balmer.  Your expertise is needed in HR for some water boarding!  And bring a chair too."</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the MS intercom system... " Paging Mr. Balmer. Your expertise is needed in HR for some water boarding !
And bring a chair too .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the MS intercom system... "Paging Mr. Balmer.  Your expertise is needed in HR for some water boarding!
And bring a chair too.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071966</id>
	<title>Re:they've been copying Mac all along...</title>
	<author>ArcherB</author>
	<datestamp>1258038240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple's work! And maybe now and then from somewhere else. So I'm more inclined to believe the interviewed employee than the higher-up managers refuting it. Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple, after all.</p></div><p>I installed Windows7 and to me it looks the bastard child of KDE4 and XP.  I didn't see a whole lot of Mac in there.</p><p>To me, Mac is that little parabolic taskbar thingie (doc?) with the hopping icons on the bottom that is not really a task bar, disks that are icons directly on the desktop (as opposed to "My Computer") and the menu bar on the top  that confuses most normal people because it changes with whichever application is active.  None of that is in 7.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple 's work !
And maybe now and then from somewhere else .
So I 'm more inclined to believe the interviewed employee than the higher-up managers refuting it .
Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple , after all.I installed Windows7 and to me it looks the bastard child of KDE4 and XP .
I did n't see a whole lot of Mac in there.To me , Mac is that little parabolic taskbar thingie ( doc ?
) with the hopping icons on the bottom that is not really a task bar , disks that are icons directly on the desktop ( as opposed to " My Computer " ) and the menu bar on the top that confuses most normal people because it changes with whichever application is active .
None of that is in 7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For sure the prime source of inspiration and functions for Windows comes from Apple's work!
And maybe now and then from somewhere else.
So I'm more inclined to believe the interviewed employee than the higher-up managers refuting it.
Of course they can not admit they simply copy Apple, after all.I installed Windows7 and to me it looks the bastard child of KDE4 and XP.
I didn't see a whole lot of Mac in there.To me, Mac is that little parabolic taskbar thingie (doc?
) with the hopping icons on the bottom that is not really a task bar, disks that are icons directly on the desktop (as opposed to "My Computer") and the menu bar on the top  that confuses most normal people because it changes with whichever application is active.
None of that is in 7.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072298</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>johneee</author>
	<datestamp>1258039920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> users. Let the users tell you what is good and bad. Build the interface to match the user.</i></p><p>The interesting thing here is that your evidence doesn't match the examples.</p><p>Microsoft puts every single thing they do in front of users, and tests it to death.  Apple puts some really smart, good designers in a room and they do what they think is best. (overly simplified, but you get the idea)</p><p>One of the first things Jobs did when he came to Apple was to kill the UI research group.  They have a unified, attractive and logical interface because they keep it tightly controled and don't let groups of just anyone come in and tell them to change things. They're also secretive to the point of paranoia, which means they'd never be able to do user testing groups before launch of anything.</p><p>Microsoft is bland because every single thing they do is tested over and over and over again with user groups, which gives them a lot of data, but means they end up with the lowest common denominator on everything.</p><p>You can make your own decision on which is better.</p><p>I actually read something that made the case that Microsoft was too consumer focussed.  This is around the time when MS had just got the security religion and the person said that until then, nobody was asking for security in their focus groups and market research, just features and compatibility with older software. Geeks were asking for security, but they made up a relatively small number of people in the market. When worms,viri and root-kits and all that started being more and more prevelent, people started asking for security, and so MS started doing security.</p><p>Short version:  Ask your users what they need all you want, but you're always going to be a reactive organization, and you're never going to surprise anyone, because they'll always just get what they ask for. If you make educated guesses what they need, you'll sometimes blow them away with something awesome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>users .
Let the users tell you what is good and bad .
Build the interface to match the user.The interesting thing here is that your evidence does n't match the examples.Microsoft puts every single thing they do in front of users , and tests it to death .
Apple puts some really smart , good designers in a room and they do what they think is best .
( overly simplified , but you get the idea ) One of the first things Jobs did when he came to Apple was to kill the UI research group .
They have a unified , attractive and logical interface because they keep it tightly controled and do n't let groups of just anyone come in and tell them to change things .
They 're also secretive to the point of paranoia , which means they 'd never be able to do user testing groups before launch of anything.Microsoft is bland because every single thing they do is tested over and over and over again with user groups , which gives them a lot of data , but means they end up with the lowest common denominator on everything.You can make your own decision on which is better.I actually read something that made the case that Microsoft was too consumer focussed .
This is around the time when MS had just got the security religion and the person said that until then , nobody was asking for security in their focus groups and market research , just features and compatibility with older software .
Geeks were asking for security , but they made up a relatively small number of people in the market .
When worms,viri and root-kits and all that started being more and more prevelent , people started asking for security , and so MS started doing security.Short version : Ask your users what they need all you want , but you 're always going to be a reactive organization , and you 're never going to surprise anyone , because they 'll always just get what they ask for .
If you make educated guesses what they need , you 'll sometimes blow them away with something awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> users.
Let the users tell you what is good and bad.
Build the interface to match the user.The interesting thing here is that your evidence doesn't match the examples.Microsoft puts every single thing they do in front of users, and tests it to death.
Apple puts some really smart, good designers in a room and they do what they think is best.
(overly simplified, but you get the idea)One of the first things Jobs did when he came to Apple was to kill the UI research group.
They have a unified, attractive and logical interface because they keep it tightly controled and don't let groups of just anyone come in and tell them to change things.
They're also secretive to the point of paranoia, which means they'd never be able to do user testing groups before launch of anything.Microsoft is bland because every single thing they do is tested over and over and over again with user groups, which gives them a lot of data, but means they end up with the lowest common denominator on everything.You can make your own decision on which is better.I actually read something that made the case that Microsoft was too consumer focussed.
This is around the time when MS had just got the security religion and the person said that until then, nobody was asking for security in their focus groups and market research, just features and compatibility with older software.
Geeks were asking for security, but they made up a relatively small number of people in the market.
When worms,viri and root-kits and all that started being more and more prevelent, people started asking for security, and so MS started doing security.Short version:  Ask your users what they need all you want, but you're always going to be a reactive organization, and you're never going to surprise anyone, because they'll always just get what they ask for.
If you make educated guesses what they need, you'll sometimes blow them away with something awesome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073690</id>
	<title>There's Nothing Uglier Than...</title>
	<author>flameproof</author>
	<datestamp>1258045800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lipstick on a pig.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lipstick on a pig .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lipstick on a pig.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071608</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258036380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>One of the problems OS X has is that it lacks the ability to use these menus through the keyboard easily</p></div><p>Remembering the shortcuts on Macs is usually easier because they are consistent (ignoring the three different ways I have of making Apple's video-playing apps run full screen, and the fourth way that VLC uses).  On Windows, an entire key on the keyboard is reserved for going to the menu bar.  This is something that most users don't do - they either click on the menu with the mouse or hit shortcuts directly - and so on OS X is a chord.  By default, it's control-F2, but it's configurable in System Preferences, so if you want it to be something easier to hit then you can change it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the problems OS X has is that it lacks the ability to use these menus through the keyboard easilyRemembering the shortcuts on Macs is usually easier because they are consistent ( ignoring the three different ways I have of making Apple 's video-playing apps run full screen , and the fourth way that VLC uses ) .
On Windows , an entire key on the keyboard is reserved for going to the menu bar .
This is something that most users do n't do - they either click on the menu with the mouse or hit shortcuts directly - and so on OS X is a chord .
By default , it 's control-F2 , but it 's configurable in System Preferences , so if you want it to be something easier to hit then you can change it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the problems OS X has is that it lacks the ability to use these menus through the keyboard easilyRemembering the shortcuts on Macs is usually easier because they are consistent (ignoring the three different ways I have of making Apple's video-playing apps run full screen, and the fourth way that VLC uses).
On Windows, an entire key on the keyboard is reserved for going to the menu bar.
This is something that most users don't do - they either click on the menu with the mouse or hit shortcuts directly - and so on OS X is a chord.
By default, it's control-F2, but it's configurable in System Preferences, so if you want it to be something easier to hit then you can change it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072166</id>
	<title>Duh!</title>
	<author>db32</author>
	<datestamp>1258039380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If Microsoft hasn't been copying Macs the entire time they would be shipping 5-Star notebooks and Bic pens rebranded as MS office.  Aqua vs Aero?  I think the jab there is fairly obvious.  Dashboard vs Sidebar?  They are like the same damned thing, except Dashboard is less irritating.  Apple makes iPod, MS rushes to make a Zune?  I realize their products are very different under the hood, and how they behave, but on the surface MS spends quite a bit of time copying Apple to make "original and innovative" things for Windows.  I haven't used Win 7 myself yet, but I have watched people show it off and the first thing I thought of in many of the new "shiney" is "Hey, Mac was doing that a year or two ago".</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Microsoft has n't been copying Macs the entire time they would be shipping 5-Star notebooks and Bic pens rebranded as MS office .
Aqua vs Aero ?
I think the jab there is fairly obvious .
Dashboard vs Sidebar ?
They are like the same damned thing , except Dashboard is less irritating .
Apple makes iPod , MS rushes to make a Zune ?
I realize their products are very different under the hood , and how they behave , but on the surface MS spends quite a bit of time copying Apple to make " original and innovative " things for Windows .
I have n't used Win 7 myself yet , but I have watched people show it off and the first thing I thought of in many of the new " shiney " is " Hey , Mac was doing that a year or two ago " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Microsoft hasn't been copying Macs the entire time they would be shipping 5-Star notebooks and Bic pens rebranded as MS office.
Aqua vs Aero?
I think the jab there is fairly obvious.
Dashboard vs Sidebar?
They are like the same damned thing, except Dashboard is less irritating.
Apple makes iPod, MS rushes to make a Zune?
I realize their products are very different under the hood, and how they behave, but on the surface MS spends quite a bit of time copying Apple to make "original and innovative" things for Windows.
I haven't used Win 7 myself yet, but I have watched people show it off and the first thing I thought of in many of the new "shiney" is "Hey, Mac was doing that a year or two ago".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30092128</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258108500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't know if the new Vista7 (or whatever they are calling it) is like a Mac, I don't use the crapple system.</p><p>I didn't like OS/X or Safari so I don't use them.</p><p>The Apple hardware is very nice, but I can buy 3 win PC's for the price of one.</p><p>If you don't like Windows then don't use it. If you can do better than Microsoft then go create your own O/S!</p><p>To each his own.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't know if the new Vista7 ( or whatever they are calling it ) is like a Mac , I do n't use the crapple system.I did n't like OS/X or Safari so I do n't use them.The Apple hardware is very nice , but I can buy 3 win PC 's for the price of one.If you do n't like Windows then do n't use it .
If you can do better than Microsoft then go create your own O/S ! To each his own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't know if the new Vista7 (or whatever they are calling it) is like a Mac, I don't use the crapple system.I didn't like OS/X or Safari so I don't use them.The Apple hardware is very nice, but I can buy 3 win PC's for the price of one.If you don't like Windows then don't use it.
If you can do better than Microsoft then go create your own O/S!To each his own.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30079442</id>
	<title>Re:Look and Feel</title>
	<author>maccam</author>
	<datestamp>1258022220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why say allegedly? MS eventually paid Apple (Scully's time) for use of some interface features to head off that lawsuit. The flagship apps of Office were Mac apps before long they were Windows apps. So, you expect us to believe that MS used none of what they learned during years of writing for Apple's GUI in the development of Windows?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why say allegedly ?
MS eventually paid Apple ( Scully 's time ) for use of some interface features to head off that lawsuit .
The flagship apps of Office were Mac apps before long they were Windows apps .
So , you expect us to believe that MS used none of what they learned during years of writing for Apple 's GUI in the development of Windows ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why say allegedly?
MS eventually paid Apple (Scully's time) for use of some interface features to head off that lawsuit.
The flagship apps of Office were Mac apps before long they were Windows apps.
So, you expect us to believe that MS used none of what they learned during years of writing for Apple's GUI in the development of Windows?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071860</id>
	<title>Re:Should've named it Vista7 or Vista-II instead..</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1258037820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the reality is, after a while Vista really wasn't all that bad.</p><p>I ran it for just over a year before 7 came out without a single flaw whatsoever. Vistas biggest problem was it was pretty crappy in it's earlier days and it never really managed to shake off that image.</p><p>I guess the situation in your area isn't representative, because Windows 7 adoption is currently well above Vista adoption.</p><p>Windows 7 has certainly been rather successful so far and it seems to have a much better public image than Vista earmed from it's crappy earlier releases.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the reality is , after a while Vista really was n't all that bad.I ran it for just over a year before 7 came out without a single flaw whatsoever .
Vistas biggest problem was it was pretty crappy in it 's earlier days and it never really managed to shake off that image.I guess the situation in your area is n't representative , because Windows 7 adoption is currently well above Vista adoption.Windows 7 has certainly been rather successful so far and it seems to have a much better public image than Vista earmed from it 's crappy earlier releases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the reality is, after a while Vista really wasn't all that bad.I ran it for just over a year before 7 came out without a single flaw whatsoever.
Vistas biggest problem was it was pretty crappy in it's earlier days and it never really managed to shake off that image.I guess the situation in your area isn't representative, because Windows 7 adoption is currently well above Vista adoption.Windows 7 has certainly been rather successful so far and it seems to have a much better public image than Vista earmed from it's crappy earlier releases.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074592</id>
	<title>Re:Should've named it Vista7 or Vista-II instead..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258049340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>oh, well, if our worthless tech support slaves are stealing 10 year old software using their fantastic technical "degrees" it must mean doom for Microsoft's fastest selling OS to date.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>oh , well , if our worthless tech support slaves are stealing 10 year old software using their fantastic technical " degrees " it must mean doom for Microsoft 's fastest selling OS to date .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh, well, if our worthless tech support slaves are stealing 10 year old software using their fantastic technical "degrees" it must mean doom for Microsoft's fastest selling OS to date.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30080978</id>
	<title>Xerox called . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258027860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> . . . and wants their mouse back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
and wants their mouse back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> .
. .
and wants their mouse back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071456</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>sitarlo</author>
	<datestamp>1258035240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or, totally informed person tells the truth and evil corporation fabricates a "rebuttal" to save face.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , totally informed person tells the truth and evil corporation fabricates a " rebuttal " to save face .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, totally informed person tells the truth and evil corporation fabricates a "rebuttal" to save face.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073188</id>
	<title>Apparently</title>
	<author>idontgno</author>
	<datestamp>1258043520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>life DOES follow <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM649iQ0ass" title="youtube.com">art</a> [youtube.com].</p><p>(Using a liberal definition of "art" to encompass advertising.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>life DOES follow art [ youtube.com ] .
( Using a liberal definition of " art " to encompass advertising .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>life DOES follow art [youtube.com].
(Using a liberal definition of "art" to encompass advertising.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30089802</id>
	<title>they missed OSX...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258141200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmmmm, my first thought after going from XP to windows 7 was how similar to KDE 4.3 it was.  I skipped vista, so I'm not sure if KDE leveraged some of vistas UI or not, but W7 and KDE seem to have a very similar feel.  However, it looks like W7 has a log of old dialogs that seem unchanged from XP, so the UI of W7 seems very disjointed when the UI's for a sequence of dialogs change.  KDE feels a little more consistent.  Gnome and OSX feel much more similar when switching back and forth....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmmm , my first thought after going from XP to windows 7 was how similar to KDE 4.3 it was .
I skipped vista , so I 'm not sure if KDE leveraged some of vistas UI or not , but W7 and KDE seem to have a very similar feel .
However , it looks like W7 has a log of old dialogs that seem unchanged from XP , so the UI of W7 seems very disjointed when the UI 's for a sequence of dialogs change .
KDE feels a little more consistent .
Gnome and OSX feel much more similar when switching back and forth... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmmm, my first thought after going from XP to windows 7 was how similar to KDE 4.3 it was.
I skipped vista, so I'm not sure if KDE leveraged some of vistas UI or not, but W7 and KDE seem to have a very similar feel.
However, it looks like W7 has a log of old dialogs that seem unchanged from XP, so the UI of W7 seems very disjointed when the UI's for a sequence of dialogs change.
KDE feels a little more consistent.
Gnome and OSX feel much more similar when switching back and forth....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073570</id>
	<title>Re:Things not to do if you like your job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258045140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pfft.  I call that a "Tuesday".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pfft .
I call that a " Tuesday " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pfft.
I call that a "Tuesday".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071892</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>zmollusc</author>
	<datestamp>1258037940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting. My background is cpm/dos/windows/(lately)linux and a few years ago i was messing about with a bondi blue iMac on OS7. I found it hard to get it to do anything, it couldn't see any win or linux boxes or any printers on the lan, which I half expected, but there didn't seem to be much in the way of configuration for the network or the screen or indeed any hardware compared with the equivalent win95/98.  Maybe what I want to do isn't what Apple expects me to want to do?<br>I would welcome the chance to try a more modern mac and see how things have altered.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting .
My background is cpm/dos/windows/ ( lately ) linux and a few years ago i was messing about with a bondi blue iMac on OS7 .
I found it hard to get it to do anything , it could n't see any win or linux boxes or any printers on the lan , which I half expected , but there did n't seem to be much in the way of configuration for the network or the screen or indeed any hardware compared with the equivalent win95/98 .
Maybe what I want to do is n't what Apple expects me to want to do ? I would welcome the chance to try a more modern mac and see how things have altered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting.
My background is cpm/dos/windows/(lately)linux and a few years ago i was messing about with a bondi blue iMac on OS7.
I found it hard to get it to do anything, it couldn't see any win or linux boxes or any printers on the lan, which I half expected, but there didn't seem to be much in the way of configuration for the network or the screen or indeed any hardware compared with the equivalent win95/98.
Maybe what I want to do isn't what Apple expects me to want to do?I would welcome the chance to try a more modern mac and see how things have altered.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073382</id>
	<title>This isn't news to me</title>
	<author>Moas</author>
	<datestamp>1258044300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A few years ago before Vista came out I went to the local Apple store with her and glanced at one of the desktops.

I clicked around for a minute saw the sidebar, "Aero" interface, how the icons jumped around smoothly, etc.

I said to her "That's what the new Windows interface is going to look like; they are always copying from Apple".  Now keep in mind I hadn't seen a preview of Vista at this time.

Sure enough Microsoft's interface looked and acted like the one in the Apple store.

I pretty much only use Microsoft products...but I thought it was very funny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A few years ago before Vista came out I went to the local Apple store with her and glanced at one of the desktops .
I clicked around for a minute saw the sidebar , " Aero " interface , how the icons jumped around smoothly , etc .
I said to her " That 's what the new Windows interface is going to look like ; they are always copying from Apple " .
Now keep in mind I had n't seen a preview of Vista at this time .
Sure enough Microsoft 's interface looked and acted like the one in the Apple store .
I pretty much only use Microsoft products...but I thought it was very funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A few years ago before Vista came out I went to the local Apple store with her and glanced at one of the desktops.
I clicked around for a minute saw the sidebar, "Aero" interface, how the icons jumped around smoothly, etc.
I said to her "That's what the new Windows interface is going to look like; they are always copying from Apple".
Now keep in mind I hadn't seen a preview of Vista at this time.
Sure enough Microsoft's interface looked and acted like the one in the Apple store.
I pretty much only use Microsoft products...but I thought it was very funny.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071964</id>
	<title>Re:Hello Streisand</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258038240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>Would it have ended up on slashdot even if MS hadn't issued the denial?</i></p> </div><p>Uh, considering it had already been on Slashdot... yes?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would it have ended up on slashdot even if MS had n't issued the denial ?
Uh , considering it had already been on Slashdot... yes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Would it have ended up on slashdot even if MS hadn't issued the denial?
Uh, considering it had already been on Slashdot... yes?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071542</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1258035900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>in other news, Microsoft employee says "iPhone is better than WinMobile", cue Microsoft fanbois to criticise employee and distract everyone from the frickin' obvious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in other news , Microsoft employee says " iPhone is better than WinMobile " , cue Microsoft fanbois to criticise employee and distract everyone from the frickin ' obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in other news, Microsoft employee says "iPhone is better than WinMobile", cue Microsoft fanbois to criticise employee and distract everyone from the frickin' obvious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30080986</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Kerrigann</author>
	<datestamp>1258027920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Alt-` is what you're looking for, I think.</p><p>I think the apple way of doing this is to hit the expose key, then use the keyboard if you're looking for a specific window.</p><p>I really really love the dock concept -- why do I have to have a firefox window open to keep downloads running?  Why do programs have to go out of their way to manage system tray entries?  If a program has a system tray entry, why are there *two* ways to minimize that app's window?  All of this is solved by the dock!</p><p>But, it's taken me forever to get used to the two level window switching that you're talking about.  It still tends to feel clunky.  I guess I could use the expose key, but it's not as conveniently placed where my left hand can reach it in the resting position.  I can't help but think there is a better way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Alt- ` is what you 're looking for , I think.I think the apple way of doing this is to hit the expose key , then use the keyboard if you 're looking for a specific window.I really really love the dock concept -- why do I have to have a firefox window open to keep downloads running ?
Why do programs have to go out of their way to manage system tray entries ?
If a program has a system tray entry , why are there * two * ways to minimize that app 's window ?
All of this is solved by the dock ! But , it 's taken me forever to get used to the two level window switching that you 're talking about .
It still tends to feel clunky .
I guess I could use the expose key , but it 's not as conveniently placed where my left hand can reach it in the resting position .
I ca n't help but think there is a better way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alt-` is what you're looking for, I think.I think the apple way of doing this is to hit the expose key, then use the keyboard if you're looking for a specific window.I really really love the dock concept -- why do I have to have a firefox window open to keep downloads running?
Why do programs have to go out of their way to manage system tray entries?
If a program has a system tray entry, why are there *two* ways to minimize that app's window?
All of this is solved by the dock!But, it's taken me forever to get used to the two level window switching that you're talking about.
It still tends to feel clunky.
I guess I could use the expose key, but it's not as conveniently placed where my left hand can reach it in the resting position.
I can't help but think there is a better way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30076116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077340</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258057740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hit the windows key and type the first couple of letters of what you want to run/open. Since vista the win key is one of the most used on my keyboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hit the windows key and type the first couple of letters of what you want to run/open .
Since vista the win key is one of the most used on my keyboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hit the windows key and type the first couple of letters of what you want to run/open.
Since vista the win key is one of the most used on my keyboard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073604</id>
	<title>Re:Things not to do if you like your job</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1258045260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The employee must have just got all caught up in the "I'm a PC, and Windows 7 is my idea" campaign.<br>He didn't get the memo telling all Microsoft employees that 'Windows 7 was not the idea of Microsoft employees, we want to blame the public so don't say it is your idea.'<br><br>But really, after reading the article, it should be easy to understand that he was talking about having pretty graphics in the UI and OS X is known for that.  Not a big deal since Microsoft has been attempting to make Windows look better since v3.x and most all their innovations come from copying others rather poorly.<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>The employee must have just got all caught up in the " I 'm a PC , and Windows 7 is my idea " campaign.He did n't get the memo telling all Microsoft employees that 'Windows 7 was not the idea of Microsoft employees , we want to blame the public so do n't say it is your idea .
'But really , after reading the article , it should be easy to understand that he was talking about having pretty graphics in the UI and OS X is known for that .
Not a big deal since Microsoft has been attempting to make Windows look better since v3.x and most all their innovations come from copying others rather poorly.LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The employee must have just got all caught up in the "I'm a PC, and Windows 7 is my idea" campaign.He didn't get the memo telling all Microsoft employees that 'Windows 7 was not the idea of Microsoft employees, we want to blame the public so don't say it is your idea.
'But really, after reading the article, it should be easy to understand that he was talking about having pretty graphics in the UI and OS X is known for that.
Not a big deal since Microsoft has been attempting to make Windows look better since v3.x and most all their innovations come from copying others rather poorly.LoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071478</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>RedK</author>
	<datestamp>1258035360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or you know, this guy just let out the big dirty secret and in an attempt to save face, the "Windows team" puts out an official response that claims the contrary even though at this point it's pretty obvious to anyone with 1 functionning eye, trying to kill the first guy's credibility in order to sweep all of this under the rug.</p><p>The end the night by sucking their collective thumb and weeping for their mommies to "make it all go away".</p><p>See, anyone can say anything about it.  The few people who know the actual truth (the first guy and the Windows team) won't ever tell us the real truth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or you know , this guy just let out the big dirty secret and in an attempt to save face , the " Windows team " puts out an official response that claims the contrary even though at this point it 's pretty obvious to anyone with 1 functionning eye , trying to kill the first guy 's credibility in order to sweep all of this under the rug.The end the night by sucking their collective thumb and weeping for their mommies to " make it all go away " .See , anyone can say anything about it .
The few people who know the actual truth ( the first guy and the Windows team ) wo n't ever tell us the real truth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or you know, this guy just let out the big dirty secret and in an attempt to save face, the "Windows team" puts out an official response that claims the contrary even though at this point it's pretty obvious to anyone with 1 functionning eye, trying to kill the first guy's credibility in order to sweep all of this under the rug.The end the night by sucking their collective thumb and weeping for their mommies to "make it all go away".See, anyone can say anything about it.
The few people who know the actual truth (the first guy and the Windows team) won't ever tell us the real truth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071532</id>
	<title>Hi, my name is Steve Jobs...</title>
	<author>DaRanged</author>
	<datestamp>1258035840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... and Windows 7 was my idea!</htmltext>
<tokenext>... and Windows 7 was my idea !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and Windows 7 was my idea!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081714</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Skuld-Chan</author>
	<datestamp>1258031940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why alt-f-s when command-s will do? While most Windows users will actually click on file-&gt;save to save their document, very few Mac users I've seen bother with clicking on the menus for most common tasks; it's all done with the keyboard.</p></div></blockquote><p>Windows apps conventionally use ctrl+s to save, ctrl+p to print etc. Also like the mac ctrl+xvc (cut, copy and paste) is the same.</p><p>mj</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why alt-f-s when command-s will do ?
While most Windows users will actually click on file- &gt; save to save their document , very few Mac users I 've seen bother with clicking on the menus for most common tasks ; it 's all done with the keyboard.Windows apps conventionally use ctrl + s to save , ctrl + p to print etc .
Also like the mac ctrl + xvc ( cut , copy and paste ) is the same.mj</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why alt-f-s when command-s will do?
While most Windows users will actually click on file-&gt;save to save their document, very few Mac users I've seen bother with clicking on the menus for most common tasks; it's all done with the keyboard.Windows apps conventionally use ctrl+s to save, ctrl+p to print etc.
Also like the mac ctrl+xvc (cut, copy and paste) is the same.mj
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077176</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>ProfessionalCookie</author>
	<datestamp>1258057200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you're looking for Control-F2.  After that menu selections are alphabetical, using space or enter to select an item.  Menus can also be navigated in a 2d grid with arrow keys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're looking for Control-F2 .
After that menu selections are alphabetical , using space or enter to select an item .
Menus can also be navigated in a 2d grid with arrow keys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're looking for Control-F2.
After that menu selections are alphabetical, using space or enter to select an item.
Menus can also be navigated in a 2d grid with arrow keys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081760</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1258032120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>God, the tosser mods really walk into this one so predictable:</p><p>"As always, subjective assertions without evidence get modded up simply because they are pro-Apple, whilst I bet I - even though I give clear examples and evidence - will get modded down, simply because these facts do not fit with an Apple moderator's worldview (how does moderation work these days, anyway? I haven't had any for years, and it seems they're only given out to those who mod up pro-Apple posts these days...)"</p><p>Proof that moderation on Apple stories just doesn't work.</p><p>How about you respond with arguments and evidence, instead of foaming at the mouth and reaching for the moderation button, to abuse the overabundance of mod points that you unfairly get?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>God , the tosser mods really walk into this one so predictable : " As always , subjective assertions without evidence get modded up simply because they are pro-Apple , whilst I bet I - even though I give clear examples and evidence - will get modded down , simply because these facts do not fit with an Apple moderator 's worldview ( how does moderation work these days , anyway ?
I have n't had any for years , and it seems they 're only given out to those who mod up pro-Apple posts these days... ) " Proof that moderation on Apple stories just does n't work.How about you respond with arguments and evidence , instead of foaming at the mouth and reaching for the moderation button , to abuse the overabundance of mod points that you unfairly get ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God, the tosser mods really walk into this one so predictable:"As always, subjective assertions without evidence get modded up simply because they are pro-Apple, whilst I bet I - even though I give clear examples and evidence - will get modded down, simply because these facts do not fit with an Apple moderator's worldview (how does moderation work these days, anyway?
I haven't had any for years, and it seems they're only given out to those who mod up pro-Apple posts these days...)"Proof that moderation on Apple stories just doesn't work.How about you respond with arguments and evidence, instead of foaming at the mouth and reaching for the moderation button, to abuse the overabundance of mod points that you unfairly get?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071554</id>
	<title>Re:If this is true...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258035960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't know how to use it properly then...</p><p>I am no Windows fan, I have Snow Leopard, Windows 7, XP and Linux (Suse, RedHat, CentOS and unbreakable Linux) all on differing machines...<br>All in all, Windows 7 has been stable as a rock on my machine...no problems to report apart from lacking Samsung Scanner Drivers...not MS' fault.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't know how to use it properly then...I am no Windows fan , I have Snow Leopard , Windows 7 , XP and Linux ( Suse , RedHat , CentOS and unbreakable Linux ) all on differing machines...All in all , Windows 7 has been stable as a rock on my machine...no problems to report apart from lacking Samsung Scanner Drivers...not MS ' fault .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't know how to use it properly then...I am no Windows fan, I have Snow Leopard, Windows 7, XP and Linux (Suse, RedHat, CentOS and unbreakable Linux) all on differing machines...All in all, Windows 7 has been stable as a rock on my machine...no problems to report apart from lacking Samsung Scanner Drivers...not MS' fault.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330</id>
	<title>ego</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258034220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Random person thinks he knows everything, grows an ego and tells "juicy" stuff to press to boost that said ego while actually knowing nothing.</p><p>Nothing to see here. But I suspect lots of Linux/Mac OSX fanatics will be coming in 3.. 2.. 1..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Random person thinks he knows everything , grows an ego and tells " juicy " stuff to press to boost that said ego while actually knowing nothing.Nothing to see here .
But I suspect lots of Linux/Mac OSX fanatics will be coming in 3.. 2.. 1. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Random person thinks he knows everything, grows an ego and tells "juicy" stuff to press to boost that said ego while actually knowing nothing.Nothing to see here.
But I suspect lots of Linux/Mac OSX fanatics will be coming in 3.. 2.. 1..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072734</id>
	<title>Re:Hello Streisand</title>
	<author>CrazedSanity</author>
	<datestamp>1258041840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would venture to guess that the retraction wasn't for the reasons that it appeared to be.  Mr. Simon Aldous made a statement that essentially compared Microsoft to Apple, but I don't think the issue at hand has anything to do with any "stealing ideas from Mac" or anything like that; the problem is that Simon basically said, "Mac's interface is better than ours and has been for a long time, so now we're gonna start making ours look like theirs, 'cuz ours sucks."  Joe-Bob might read it and think, "wow, Microsoft even says Mac is better, why don't I just buy a Mac?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would venture to guess that the retraction was n't for the reasons that it appeared to be .
Mr. Simon Aldous made a statement that essentially compared Microsoft to Apple , but I do n't think the issue at hand has anything to do with any " stealing ideas from Mac " or anything like that ; the problem is that Simon basically said , " Mac 's interface is better than ours and has been for a long time , so now we 're gon na start making ours look like theirs , 'cuz ours sucks .
" Joe-Bob might read it and think , " wow , Microsoft even says Mac is better , why do n't I just buy a Mac ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would venture to guess that the retraction wasn't for the reasons that it appeared to be.
Mr. Simon Aldous made a statement that essentially compared Microsoft to Apple, but I don't think the issue at hand has anything to do with any "stealing ideas from Mac" or anything like that; the problem is that Simon basically said, "Mac's interface is better than ours and has been for a long time, so now we're gonna start making ours look like theirs, 'cuz ours sucks.
"  Joe-Bob might read it and think, "wow, Microsoft even says Mac is better, why don't I just buy a Mac?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072084</id>
	<title>Re:Hello Streisand</title>
	<author>digitalhermit</author>
	<datestamp>1258038900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be quite a brilliant move. I imagine that people would be more likely to look at Win7 now if there's a possibility that it was closer to Mac. That's like saying, "We tried to copy the Ferrari design cues. Ferrari engines still suck though, because they're, umm, unreliable."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be quite a brilliant move .
I imagine that people would be more likely to look at Win7 now if there 's a possibility that it was closer to Mac .
That 's like saying , " We tried to copy the Ferrari design cues .
Ferrari engines still suck though , because they 're , umm , unreliable .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be quite a brilliant move.
I imagine that people would be more likely to look at Win7 now if there's a possibility that it was closer to Mac.
That's like saying, "We tried to copy the Ferrari design cues.
Ferrari engines still suck though, because they're, umm, unreliable.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30088326</id>
	<title>Re:Hello Streisand</title>
	<author>andruk</author>
	<datestamp>1258135320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Somebody above pointed out the fact that what he said could be grounds for a lawsuit under unfair competition laws. So Microsoft was left between a rock and a hard place. If they didn't say anything, Apple could try to take them to court over copying their specific look and feel ideas (the 1990's case covering this is also mentioned above), but if they did try to officially retract his statement, the Streisand affect comes into play.</p><p>They were in a damned-if-they-do-damned-if-they-don't situation, because let's face it: they did copy a lot of ideas from other operating systems.  Perhaps they should try to come up with their own ideas instead of playing follow the leader/s (Apple and the KDE team) in UI design.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Somebody above pointed out the fact that what he said could be grounds for a lawsuit under unfair competition laws .
So Microsoft was left between a rock and a hard place .
If they did n't say anything , Apple could try to take them to court over copying their specific look and feel ideas ( the 1990 's case covering this is also mentioned above ) , but if they did try to officially retract his statement , the Streisand affect comes into play.They were in a damned-if-they-do-damned-if-they-do n't situation , because let 's face it : they did copy a lot of ideas from other operating systems .
Perhaps they should try to come up with their own ideas instead of playing follow the leader/s ( Apple and the KDE team ) in UI design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somebody above pointed out the fact that what he said could be grounds for a lawsuit under unfair competition laws.
So Microsoft was left between a rock and a hard place.
If they didn't say anything, Apple could try to take them to court over copying their specific look and feel ideas (the 1990's case covering this is also mentioned above), but if they did try to officially retract his statement, the Streisand affect comes into play.They were in a damned-if-they-do-damned-if-they-don't situation, because let's face it: they did copy a lot of ideas from other operating systems.
Perhaps they should try to come up with their own ideas instead of playing follow the leader/s (Apple and the KDE team) in UI design.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071774</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1258037400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I actually agree with you, but yet look at the Office 2007 UI.</p><p>It does a great job of solving the problems you state, options that aren't relevant are hidden, and only options relevant in the context of what you are doing are shown. To me this is a much better way of doing things, and yet the amount of people who complain, the amount who hate it far outnumber those who like it- OpenOffice and Firefox have recieved the same feedback when they suggested the same type of change to a UI that only provides what is relevant in the context of the actions being carried out for their applications too.</p><p>So the question is, whilst to some people like you and I the simplified context relevant system seems better, is there an underlying reason many others hate it? Do they simply dislike change? or is there something else there, like a context based system being more confusing for them because things aren't always where they were?</p><p>For what it's worth though I actually hate many of the Windows 7 changes, the new gadget system is appalling compared to the sidebar. Gadgets are useless because they're either on the desktop, out the way, and you have to explicitly switch to the desktop to see them in which case if you have to explicitly switch they may as well just be applications or alternatively they can be set to be always on top which means they obscure any windows you're working with underneath them. The sidebar ensured this wasn't a problem by allowing Windows to resize around the sidebar meaning they were both always on top, always available and yet never in the way.</p><p>I also found the taskbar changes unhelpful on a large screen, although it's great on the small screen of my netbook where taskbar space is limited, but on my 24" screen at 1900x1200 the new system only uses up about 20\% of the length of the taskbar and yet I have to take extra clicks to find the window I want because they're all hidden in their groups. I reverted back to the classic taskbar where the Window I want is available instantly by using the full taskbar.</p><p>I even find the start menu since Vista much less efficient to navigate too in all honesty, if you don't type in the name of the program and want to click through because you don't know what icon was added the pre-Vista start menu was far more efficient.</p><p>As I say though, I do like Microsoft's ribbon interface. For me it's all about the speed and efficiency at which I can work, and much of the Windows Vista / 7 UI changes seem to add the amount of mouse movement and clicks I need to make, the Ribbon UI however does not as it puts what I need right in front of me when I need it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually agree with you , but yet look at the Office 2007 UI.It does a great job of solving the problems you state , options that are n't relevant are hidden , and only options relevant in the context of what you are doing are shown .
To me this is a much better way of doing things , and yet the amount of people who complain , the amount who hate it far outnumber those who like it- OpenOffice and Firefox have recieved the same feedback when they suggested the same type of change to a UI that only provides what is relevant in the context of the actions being carried out for their applications too.So the question is , whilst to some people like you and I the simplified context relevant system seems better , is there an underlying reason many others hate it ?
Do they simply dislike change ?
or is there something else there , like a context based system being more confusing for them because things are n't always where they were ? For what it 's worth though I actually hate many of the Windows 7 changes , the new gadget system is appalling compared to the sidebar .
Gadgets are useless because they 're either on the desktop , out the way , and you have to explicitly switch to the desktop to see them in which case if you have to explicitly switch they may as well just be applications or alternatively they can be set to be always on top which means they obscure any windows you 're working with underneath them .
The sidebar ensured this was n't a problem by allowing Windows to resize around the sidebar meaning they were both always on top , always available and yet never in the way.I also found the taskbar changes unhelpful on a large screen , although it 's great on the small screen of my netbook where taskbar space is limited , but on my 24 " screen at 1900x1200 the new system only uses up about 20 \ % of the length of the taskbar and yet I have to take extra clicks to find the window I want because they 're all hidden in their groups .
I reverted back to the classic taskbar where the Window I want is available instantly by using the full taskbar.I even find the start menu since Vista much less efficient to navigate too in all honesty , if you do n't type in the name of the program and want to click through because you do n't know what icon was added the pre-Vista start menu was far more efficient.As I say though , I do like Microsoft 's ribbon interface .
For me it 's all about the speed and efficiency at which I can work , and much of the Windows Vista / 7 UI changes seem to add the amount of mouse movement and clicks I need to make , the Ribbon UI however does not as it puts what I need right in front of me when I need it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually agree with you, but yet look at the Office 2007 UI.It does a great job of solving the problems you state, options that aren't relevant are hidden, and only options relevant in the context of what you are doing are shown.
To me this is a much better way of doing things, and yet the amount of people who complain, the amount who hate it far outnumber those who like it- OpenOffice and Firefox have recieved the same feedback when they suggested the same type of change to a UI that only provides what is relevant in the context of the actions being carried out for their applications too.So the question is, whilst to some people like you and I the simplified context relevant system seems better, is there an underlying reason many others hate it?
Do they simply dislike change?
or is there something else there, like a context based system being more confusing for them because things aren't always where they were?For what it's worth though I actually hate many of the Windows 7 changes, the new gadget system is appalling compared to the sidebar.
Gadgets are useless because they're either on the desktop, out the way, and you have to explicitly switch to the desktop to see them in which case if you have to explicitly switch they may as well just be applications or alternatively they can be set to be always on top which means they obscure any windows you're working with underneath them.
The sidebar ensured this wasn't a problem by allowing Windows to resize around the sidebar meaning they were both always on top, always available and yet never in the way.I also found the taskbar changes unhelpful on a large screen, although it's great on the small screen of my netbook where taskbar space is limited, but on my 24" screen at 1900x1200 the new system only uses up about 20\% of the length of the taskbar and yet I have to take extra clicks to find the window I want because they're all hidden in their groups.
I reverted back to the classic taskbar where the Window I want is available instantly by using the full taskbar.I even find the start menu since Vista much less efficient to navigate too in all honesty, if you don't type in the name of the program and want to click through because you don't know what icon was added the pre-Vista start menu was far more efficient.As I say though, I do like Microsoft's ribbon interface.
For me it's all about the speed and efficiency at which I can work, and much of the Windows Vista / 7 UI changes seem to add the amount of mouse movement and clicks I need to make, the Ribbon UI however does not as it puts what I need right in front of me when I need it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073368</id>
	<title>Re:This is not like OS X!</title>
	<author>HoldmyCauls</author>
	<datestamp>1258044240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And also: "We hope Boot Camp users will find it easy to install!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And also : " We hope Boot Camp users will find it easy to install !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And also: "We hope Boot Camp users will find it easy to install!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077772</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>BlueStraggler</author>
	<datestamp>1258059240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"If I had asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse."<br>
-- Henry Ford</htmltext>
<tokenext>" If I had asked my customers what they wanted , they 'd have said a faster horse .
" -- Henry Ford</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If I had asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse.
"
-- Henry Ford</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071750</id>
	<title>"built on that very stable core Vista technology"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258037280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the article: "it&rsquo;s built on that very stable core Vista technology, which is far more stable than the current Mac platform, for instance."</p><p>Apple's development model, for years, has been to perpetually tweak and improve on their existing operating system code. Not to mention it's Unix, which has been around since the dinosaurs. He even says in the article that XP was completely rebuilt for Vista, which was then gutted again for this new Vista2. He wants to talk about stability? Why am I surprised?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article : " it    s built on that very stable core Vista technology , which is far more stable than the current Mac platform , for instance .
" Apple 's development model , for years , has been to perpetually tweak and improve on their existing operating system code .
Not to mention it 's Unix , which has been around since the dinosaurs .
He even says in the article that XP was completely rebuilt for Vista , which was then gutted again for this new Vista2 .
He wants to talk about stability ?
Why am I surprised ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article: "it’s built on that very stable core Vista technology, which is far more stable than the current Mac platform, for instance.
"Apple's development model, for years, has been to perpetually tweak and improve on their existing operating system code.
Not to mention it's Unix, which has been around since the dinosaurs.
He even says in the article that XP was completely rebuilt for Vista, which was then gutted again for this new Vista2.
He wants to talk about stability?
Why am I surprised?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075420</id>
	<title>Re:Things not to do if you like your job</title>
	<author>mr exploiter</author>
	<datestamp>1258051440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I would probably go with  defecating on the CEO's desk, being caught copulating with cleaning equipment, and attempting to snort toner out of the photocopier would take up those top slots, but hey, if you think you can get away with one of those...</p></div><p>At first I thought getting caught with forking a nice cleaning lady couldn't be so bad... then I read it right.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would probably go with defecating on the CEO 's desk , being caught copulating with cleaning equipment , and attempting to snort toner out of the photocopier would take up those top slots , but hey , if you think you can get away with one of those...At first I thought getting caught with forking a nice cleaning lady could n't be so bad... then I read it right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would probably go with  defecating on the CEO's desk, being caught copulating with cleaning equipment, and attempting to snort toner out of the photocopier would take up those top slots, but hey, if you think you can get away with one of those...At first I thought getting caught with forking a nice cleaning lady couldn't be so bad... then I read it right.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071986</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>Eirenarch</author>
	<datestamp>1258038360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And if I was a shareholder in a company and any employee of the company publicly stated that competitor's product is better I would want him fired on the spot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if I was a shareholder in a company and any employee of the company publicly stated that competitor 's product is better I would want him fired on the spot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if I was a shareholder in a company and any employee of the company publicly stated that competitor's product is better I would want him fired on the spot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418</id>
	<title>What Apple does right</title>
	<author>BadAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1258034880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple and Microsoft attack the problem of user interface from two completely different points of view. Microsoft wants things to be orthogonal, logical, menu driven, hierarchical, and otherwise fully featured. Apple takes the approach that the user doesn't want to fuss with all sorts of menus and submenus (no two button mouse for years!) and just wants to do what they need as simply as possible. So you end up with two completely different interfaces.</p><p>Apple's interface is elegant but inflexible. Everything fits into the existing scheme and runs perfectly within that scheme.</p><p>Windows' interface is flexible but clumsy. While this has gotten much better in later versions, we're still looking at deeply nested menus, and applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.</p><p>However the key point is that Microsoft is gradually becoming more user-centric. As far as that goes in their own perspective. They are making changes to the OS that were implemented in Mac years ago, and now that they are here, they make Windows a better product.</p><p>Aesthetics is a major theme with Apple, and it is one that Microsoft hadn't fully embraced until Vista. Listen to the users. Let the users tell you what is good and bad. Build the interface to match the user.</p><p>In a sense, the MS employee was right. Microsoft is doing a lot to emulate Apple. And frankly, it's about time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple and Microsoft attack the problem of user interface from two completely different points of view .
Microsoft wants things to be orthogonal , logical , menu driven , hierarchical , and otherwise fully featured .
Apple takes the approach that the user does n't want to fuss with all sorts of menus and submenus ( no two button mouse for years !
) and just wants to do what they need as simply as possible .
So you end up with two completely different interfaces.Apple 's interface is elegant but inflexible .
Everything fits into the existing scheme and runs perfectly within that scheme.Windows ' interface is flexible but clumsy .
While this has gotten much better in later versions , we 're still looking at deeply nested menus , and applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.However the key point is that Microsoft is gradually becoming more user-centric .
As far as that goes in their own perspective .
They are making changes to the OS that were implemented in Mac years ago , and now that they are here , they make Windows a better product.Aesthetics is a major theme with Apple , and it is one that Microsoft had n't fully embraced until Vista .
Listen to the users .
Let the users tell you what is good and bad .
Build the interface to match the user.In a sense , the MS employee was right .
Microsoft is doing a lot to emulate Apple .
And frankly , it 's about time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple and Microsoft attack the problem of user interface from two completely different points of view.
Microsoft wants things to be orthogonal, logical, menu driven, hierarchical, and otherwise fully featured.
Apple takes the approach that the user doesn't want to fuss with all sorts of menus and submenus (no two button mouse for years!
) and just wants to do what they need as simply as possible.
So you end up with two completely different interfaces.Apple's interface is elegant but inflexible.
Everything fits into the existing scheme and runs perfectly within that scheme.Windows' interface is flexible but clumsy.
While this has gotten much better in later versions, we're still looking at deeply nested menus, and applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.However the key point is that Microsoft is gradually becoming more user-centric.
As far as that goes in their own perspective.
They are making changes to the OS that were implemented in Mac years ago, and now that they are here, they make Windows a better product.Aesthetics is a major theme with Apple, and it is one that Microsoft hadn't fully embraced until Vista.
Listen to the users.
Let the users tell you what is good and bad.
Build the interface to match the user.In a sense, the MS employee was right.
Microsoft is doing a lot to emulate Apple.
And frankly, it's about time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071962</id>
	<title>If you believe in...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258038240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>evolution.  Then the chances of a random chain of events leading to Windows 7 looking like OS X is possible.  It might even be the only explanation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>evolution .
Then the chances of a random chain of events leading to Windows 7 looking like OS X is possible .
It might even be the only explanation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>evolution.
Then the chances of a random chain of events leading to Windows 7 looking like OS X is possible.
It might even be the only explanation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071586</id>
	<title>Defenseable</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258036200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds to me like the "Liar, liar, pants on fire defense"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds to me like the " Liar , liar , pants on fire defense "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds to me like the "Liar, liar, pants on fire defense"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071540</id>
	<title>That was close</title>
	<author>lyinhart</author>
	<datestamp>1258035840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bad choice of words by the Microsoft guy - definitely spoken like someone who wasn't directly involved in the product's development. It's like he'd never heard of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple\_v.\_Microsoft" title="wikipedia.org">Apple v. Microsoft</a> [wikipedia.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bad choice of words by the Microsoft guy - definitely spoken like someone who was n't directly involved in the product 's development .
It 's like he 'd never heard of Apple v. Microsoft [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bad choice of words by the Microsoft guy - definitely spoken like someone who wasn't directly involved in the product's development.
It's like he'd never heard of Apple v. Microsoft [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072326</id>
	<title>Re:they've been copying Mac all along...</title>
	<author>Nonillion</author>
	<datestamp>1258040040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Both Apple and Microsoft copied their user interface concept from <b>Zerox Parc</b>. If I remember correctly, it was the Zerox Star OS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Both Apple and Microsoft copied their user interface concept from Zerox Parc .
If I remember correctly , it was the Zerox Star OS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Both Apple and Microsoft copied their user interface concept from Zerox Parc.
If I remember correctly, it was the Zerox Star OS</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072780</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>pete-classic</author>
	<datestamp>1258042020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>While this has gotten much better in later versions, we're still looking at deeply nested menus, and applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.</p></div></blockquote><p>I disagree.  Microsoft UI cohesiveness peaked somewhere around '95.  They used a very consistent widget set, and had a firmly established menu standard.  Then they got cute and overrode the default widgets with Media Player, opening the door for 3rd party apps to do so.  Then they flushed the menu standard in favor of their much-hated "ribbons".</p><p>Now the UI is total soup.</p><p>-Peter</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While this has gotten much better in later versions , we 're still looking at deeply nested menus , and applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.I disagree .
Microsoft UI cohesiveness peaked somewhere around '95 .
They used a very consistent widget set , and had a firmly established menu standard .
Then they got cute and overrode the default widgets with Media Player , opening the door for 3rd party apps to do so .
Then they flushed the menu standard in favor of their much-hated " ribbons " .Now the UI is total soup.-Peter</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While this has gotten much better in later versions, we're still looking at deeply nested menus, and applications which do not necessarily have any UI themes in common with each other.I disagree.
Microsoft UI cohesiveness peaked somewhere around '95.
They used a very consistent widget set, and had a firmly established menu standard.
Then they got cute and overrode the default widgets with Media Player, opening the door for 3rd party apps to do so.
Then they flushed the menu standard in favor of their much-hated "ribbons".Now the UI is total soup.-Peter
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072502</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>sycodon</author>
	<datestamp>1258040700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's "totally employed" person now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's " totally employed " person now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's "totally employed" person now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071706</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258037160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Apple's interface is elegant but inflexible. Everything fits into the existing scheme and runs perfectly within that scheme.</p><p>Bullshit.</p><p>Just look at the "zoom button" debacle on OSX. There is no "maximize window" functionality. The little green button with a "+" in it often makes the window *smaller* - or minimizes it (in the case of iTunes).</p><p>The OS is filled with these massive problems because it has been simplified to the point of being retarded.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Apple 's interface is elegant but inflexible .
Everything fits into the existing scheme and runs perfectly within that scheme.Bullshit.Just look at the " zoom button " debacle on OSX .
There is no " maximize window " functionality .
The little green button with a " + " in it often makes the window * smaller * - or minimizes it ( in the case of iTunes ) .The OS is filled with these massive problems because it has been simplified to the point of being retarded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Apple's interface is elegant but inflexible.
Everything fits into the existing scheme and runs perfectly within that scheme.Bullshit.Just look at the "zoom button" debacle on OSX.
There is no "maximize window" functionality.
The little green button with a "+" in it often makes the window *smaller* - or minimizes it (in the case of iTunes).The OS is filled with these massive problems because it has been simplified to the point of being retarded.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071408</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258034820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>or...Total butt-kisser thinks he is helping the situation by claiming Windows is like MacOSX so that there will be no reason to switch. Actual look-and-feel sucks shit, so his comment is misleading. MS fanboys try to claim Win7 is actually better in 3.. 2.. 1..</htmltext>
<tokenext>or...Total butt-kisser thinks he is helping the situation by claiming Windows is like MacOSX so that there will be no reason to switch .
Actual look-and-feel sucks shit , so his comment is misleading .
MS fanboys try to claim Win7 is actually better in 3.. 2.. 1. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or...Total butt-kisser thinks he is helping the situation by claiming Windows is like MacOSX so that there will be no reason to switch.
Actual look-and-feel sucks shit, so his comment is misleading.
MS fanboys try to claim Win7 is actually better in 3.. 2.. 1..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071734</id>
	<title>Look and Feel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258037220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering Apple's litigious nature and the fact that it once sued Microsoft for allegedly infringing on the MacOS "look and feel", I can easily see why Microsoft would want to distance itself from this guy's statements. Apple has always wanted to have exclusive rights over Mac-like graphical interfaces, damn the negative consequences to the rest of the industry.</p><p>This guy's statements are fodder for Apple's bloodthirsty lawyers. Should it turn out he's lying about Microsoft's intentions, firing him would seem to be the best course of action.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering Apple 's litigious nature and the fact that it once sued Microsoft for allegedly infringing on the MacOS " look and feel " , I can easily see why Microsoft would want to distance itself from this guy 's statements .
Apple has always wanted to have exclusive rights over Mac-like graphical interfaces , damn the negative consequences to the rest of the industry.This guy 's statements are fodder for Apple 's bloodthirsty lawyers .
Should it turn out he 's lying about Microsoft 's intentions , firing him would seem to be the best course of action .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering Apple's litigious nature and the fact that it once sued Microsoft for allegedly infringing on the MacOS "look and feel", I can easily see why Microsoft would want to distance itself from this guy's statements.
Apple has always wanted to have exclusive rights over Mac-like graphical interfaces, damn the negative consequences to the rest of the industry.This guy's statements are fodder for Apple's bloodthirsty lawyers.
Should it turn out he's lying about Microsoft's intentions, firing him would seem to be the best course of action.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30083242</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258044180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously? There are a lot of things I like about the Windows UI over the Mac UI, but menu keys are at the bottom of that list. If I have to use multiple keystrokes to navigate the menus and have to watch them to figure out what keys to press... well, that misses the whole point of menu keys. On the Mac if I forget the right key combination, sure I have to grab the mouse, but then I just watch the menu and the next time - instant gratification!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously ?
There are a lot of things I like about the Windows UI over the Mac UI , but menu keys are at the bottom of that list .
If I have to use multiple keystrokes to navigate the menus and have to watch them to figure out what keys to press... well , that misses the whole point of menu keys .
On the Mac if I forget the right key combination , sure I have to grab the mouse , but then I just watch the menu and the next time - instant gratification !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously?
There are a lot of things I like about the Windows UI over the Mac UI, but menu keys are at the bottom of that list.
If I have to use multiple keystrokes to navigate the menus and have to watch them to figure out what keys to press... well, that misses the whole point of menu keys.
On the Mac if I forget the right key combination, sure I have to grab the mouse, but then I just watch the menu and the next time - instant gratification!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30084392</id>
	<title>Re:If this is true...</title>
	<author>Atomic Fro</author>
	<datestamp>1258145580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now I don't get the OSX and Win7 comparison, they don't look that much alike.</p></div><p>Thats because Windows is so far behind and, though its is a blatant copy, its not a very well done copy.</p><p>What you do unlock the windows taskbar and move it to the left side of the screen.<br>Now, open your default mail-app and have a file mana, err exporer window open. Maybe run xp in a virtual machine.  Then check out <a href="http://erik.doernenburg.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/nextstep.png" title="doernenburg.com" rel="nofollow">this</a> [doernenburg.com] screenshot of an old version of OSX and tell me there are no similarities.</p><p>12 years later and still behind.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I do n't get the OSX and Win7 comparison , they do n't look that much alike.Thats because Windows is so far behind and , though its is a blatant copy , its not a very well done copy.What you do unlock the windows taskbar and move it to the left side of the screen.Now , open your default mail-app and have a file mana , err exporer window open .
Maybe run xp in a virtual machine .
Then check out this [ doernenburg.com ] screenshot of an old version of OSX and tell me there are no similarities.12 years later and still behind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I don't get the OSX and Win7 comparison, they don't look that much alike.Thats because Windows is so far behind and, though its is a blatant copy, its not a very well done copy.What you do unlock the windows taskbar and move it to the left side of the screen.Now, open your default mail-app and have a file mana, err exporer window open.
Maybe run xp in a virtual machine.
Then check out this [doernenburg.com] screenshot of an old version of OSX and tell me there are no similarities.12 years later and still behind.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073184</id>
	<title>Re:Look and Feel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258043520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Considering Apple's litigious nature and the fact that it once sued Microsoft for allegedly infringing on the MacOS "look and feel"</i></p><p>Thing is, Apple lost, and the ruling effectively barred all look and feel type lawsuits in the future (excluding such things as exact icon designs etc. which are a relatively minor issue). Anyhow, Apple would be foolish to open this can of worms again - last time *they* ended up being sued by Xerox over things they sued MS for, this time I'm sure that just about anything they sued MS for would have already appeared in some other previous gui (possibly quite obscure), so they could end up losing big time even if they won against MS.</p><p>Apple do much better playing the 'even MS admit they are playing catchup with our superior infterface' card.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering Apple 's litigious nature and the fact that it once sued Microsoft for allegedly infringing on the MacOS " look and feel " Thing is , Apple lost , and the ruling effectively barred all look and feel type lawsuits in the future ( excluding such things as exact icon designs etc .
which are a relatively minor issue ) .
Anyhow , Apple would be foolish to open this can of worms again - last time * they * ended up being sued by Xerox over things they sued MS for , this time I 'm sure that just about anything they sued MS for would have already appeared in some other previous gui ( possibly quite obscure ) , so they could end up losing big time even if they won against MS.Apple do much better playing the 'even MS admit they are playing catchup with our superior infterface ' card .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering Apple's litigious nature and the fact that it once sued Microsoft for allegedly infringing on the MacOS "look and feel"Thing is, Apple lost, and the ruling effectively barred all look and feel type lawsuits in the future (excluding such things as exact icon designs etc.
which are a relatively minor issue).
Anyhow, Apple would be foolish to open this can of worms again - last time *they* ended up being sued by Xerox over things they sued MS for, this time I'm sure that just about anything they sued MS for would have already appeared in some other previous gui (possibly quite obscure), so they could end up losing big time even if they won against MS.Apple do much better playing the 'even MS admit they are playing catchup with our superior infterface' card.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30082638</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>uncoveror</author>
	<datestamp>1258039320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows has always been a rip-off of Mac, and a poorly done one at that. There is nothing new about that. Microsoft has always ripped off, they have never innovated, except possibly with Microsoft Bob, which they cannot blame on anyone outside the company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows has always been a rip-off of Mac , and a poorly done one at that .
There is nothing new about that .
Microsoft has always ripped off , they have never innovated , except possibly with Microsoft Bob , which they can not blame on anyone outside the company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows has always been a rip-off of Mac, and a poorly done one at that.
There is nothing new about that.
Microsoft has always ripped off, they have never innovated, except possibly with Microsoft Bob, which they cannot blame on anyone outside the company.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30078786</id>
	<title>Re:ego</title>
	<author>Impy the Impiuos Imp</author>
	<datestamp>1258019880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Total butt-kisser thinks he is helping the situation by claiming Windows is like<br>&gt; MacOSX so that there will be no reason to switch. Actual look-and-feel sucks<br>&gt; shit, so his comment is misleading. MS fanboys try to claim Win7 is actually<br>&gt; better in 3.. 2.. 1..</p><p>No, geeked MS employee speaks truth on the minds of the actual programmers, then lawyers jump in and say, no way in hell is this an attempt to copy Apple's copyrighted look and feel, not no way, not no how.</p><p>MS keeps Apple alive to keep (noticeable) competition to avoid government monopoly charges (remember that MS pumped several hundred million into Apple a decade ago, pre iPod, when it almost went under?)  Their contract with Apple that allows them access to "significant aspects" of Apple's look and feel (which Apple signed lest Microsoft yank Apple versions of Office products, way back when) is gold for Microsoft in defending their We're-no-monopoly! claims.</p><p>So this employee's truthful, if loud, mouth, screws with that entire multi-hundred-billion dollar crystal house.</p><p>I recall the official Colecovision newsletter when I was a teen.  One "issue" (there weren't very many) talked about the Donkey Kong sequel, or maybe DK itself, don't remember.  Anyway, there was a sticker covering up a block of words.  Under the sticker, which I peeled, was "It tells the King Kong story...", where King Kong is still copyrighted.</p><p>So lawyers are skilled at saying things with a straight face for reasons that have nothing to do with anything other than money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Total butt-kisser thinks he is helping the situation by claiming Windows is like &gt; MacOSX so that there will be no reason to switch .
Actual look-and-feel sucks &gt; shit , so his comment is misleading .
MS fanboys try to claim Win7 is actually &gt; better in 3.. 2.. 1..No , geeked MS employee speaks truth on the minds of the actual programmers , then lawyers jump in and say , no way in hell is this an attempt to copy Apple 's copyrighted look and feel , not no way , not no how.MS keeps Apple alive to keep ( noticeable ) competition to avoid government monopoly charges ( remember that MS pumped several hundred million into Apple a decade ago , pre iPod , when it almost went under ?
) Their contract with Apple that allows them access to " significant aspects " of Apple 's look and feel ( which Apple signed lest Microsoft yank Apple versions of Office products , way back when ) is gold for Microsoft in defending their We 're-no-monopoly !
claims.So this employee 's truthful , if loud , mouth , screws with that entire multi-hundred-billion dollar crystal house.I recall the official Colecovision newsletter when I was a teen .
One " issue " ( there were n't very many ) talked about the Donkey Kong sequel , or maybe DK itself , do n't remember .
Anyway , there was a sticker covering up a block of words .
Under the sticker , which I peeled , was " It tells the King Kong story... " , where King Kong is still copyrighted.So lawyers are skilled at saying things with a straight face for reasons that have nothing to do with anything other than money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Total butt-kisser thinks he is helping the situation by claiming Windows is like&gt; MacOSX so that there will be no reason to switch.
Actual look-and-feel sucks&gt; shit, so his comment is misleading.
MS fanboys try to claim Win7 is actually&gt; better in 3.. 2.. 1..No, geeked MS employee speaks truth on the minds of the actual programmers, then lawyers jump in and say, no way in hell is this an attempt to copy Apple's copyrighted look and feel, not no way, not no how.MS keeps Apple alive to keep (noticeable) competition to avoid government monopoly charges (remember that MS pumped several hundred million into Apple a decade ago, pre iPod, when it almost went under?
)  Their contract with Apple that allows them access to "significant aspects" of Apple's look and feel (which Apple signed lest Microsoft yank Apple versions of Office products, way back when) is gold for Microsoft in defending their We're-no-monopoly!
claims.So this employee's truthful, if loud, mouth, screws with that entire multi-hundred-billion dollar crystal house.I recall the official Colecovision newsletter when I was a teen.
One "issue" (there weren't very many) talked about the Donkey Kong sequel, or maybe DK itself, don't remember.
Anyway, there was a sticker covering up a block of words.
Under the sticker, which I peeled, was "It tells the King Kong story...", where King Kong is still copyrighted.So lawyers are skilled at saying things with a straight face for reasons that have nothing to do with anything other than money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071636</id>
	<title>They were caught telling the truth.</title>
	<author>DoctorNathaniel</author>
	<datestamp>1258036620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Always a classic screw-up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Always a classic screw-up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Always a classic screw-up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482</id>
	<title>Re:What Apple does right</title>
	<author>Procasinator</author>
	<datestamp>1258035420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the problems OS X has is that it lacks the ability to use these menus through the keyboard easily. In Windows I can hit the Alt key, and quickly see all the menus I can open by using an other key (the letter used for the menu item will have an underscore). Such as Alt + F is the file menu.</p><p>Each menu item then can be accessed usually through an access key. So Alt - F - S would be save. I know in both Windows and Mac OS X you have direct save short cuts too, and you can configure short cuts to common items, but that's not I want.</p><p>What I want is to be able to access a menu list from the keyboard quickly while exploring, not remember various different short cuts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the problems OS X has is that it lacks the ability to use these menus through the keyboard easily .
In Windows I can hit the Alt key , and quickly see all the menus I can open by using an other key ( the letter used for the menu item will have an underscore ) .
Such as Alt + F is the file menu.Each menu item then can be accessed usually through an access key .
So Alt - F - S would be save .
I know in both Windows and Mac OS X you have direct save short cuts too , and you can configure short cuts to common items , but that 's not I want.What I want is to be able to access a menu list from the keyboard quickly while exploring , not remember various different short cuts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the problems OS X has is that it lacks the ability to use these menus through the keyboard easily.
In Windows I can hit the Alt key, and quickly see all the menus I can open by using an other key (the letter used for the menu item will have an underscore).
Such as Alt + F is the file menu.Each menu item then can be accessed usually through an access key.
So Alt - F - S would be save.
I know in both Windows and Mac OS X you have direct save short cuts too, and you can configure short cuts to common items, but that's not I want.What I want is to be able to access a menu list from the keyboard quickly while exploring, not remember various different short cuts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071514</id>
	<title>Re:If this is true...</title>
	<author>kannibal\_klown</author>
	<datestamp>1258035660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Then they did a terrible job copying OSX.  Windows 7 is still clunky, slow, and unstable.  It's nothing like OSX at all.</p></div><p>I threw Win7 onto my MacBook Pro via BootCamp for work reasons and it's running fine.  Heck, I even managed to get the 64-bit version running on it without any issues.</p><p>I've had no crashes  and it feels a little speedier than Vista.  So far it's looking like it's not a bad release.</p><p>Now I don't get the OSX and Win7 comparison, they don't look that much alike.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then they did a terrible job copying OSX .
Windows 7 is still clunky , slow , and unstable .
It 's nothing like OSX at all.I threw Win7 onto my MacBook Pro via BootCamp for work reasons and it 's running fine .
Heck , I even managed to get the 64-bit version running on it without any issues.I 've had no crashes and it feels a little speedier than Vista .
So far it 's looking like it 's not a bad release.Now I do n't get the OSX and Win7 comparison , they do n't look that much alike .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then they did a terrible job copying OSX.
Windows 7 is still clunky, slow, and unstable.
It's nothing like OSX at all.I threw Win7 onto my MacBook Pro via BootCamp for work reasons and it's running fine.
Heck, I even managed to get the 64-bit version running on it without any issues.I've had no crashes  and it feels a little speedier than Vista.
So far it's looking like it's not a bad release.Now I don't get the OSX and Win7 comparison, they don't look that much alike.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073646</id>
	<title>Re:Ideas don't occur in a vacuum</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258045500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually what I've found is that most of Apple's ideas for OS N existed as 3rd party software during OS N-1.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually what I 've found is that most of Apple 's ideas for OS N existed as 3rd party software during OS N-1 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually what I've found is that most of Apple's ideas for OS N existed as 3rd party software during OS N-1.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071506</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30083184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30079442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071860
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073110
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30082638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30076594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30088326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30083684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30078786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30084392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30080356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072084
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30083242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30076116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30080986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30085366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30082844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30084402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30097250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_12_0433252_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073570
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073726
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077962
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073558
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071912
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071750
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073368
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30079442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071580
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072298
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30080356
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077772
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30085366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071482
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074206
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071938
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081714
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30083684
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081970
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30082844
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30076116
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30080986
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30097250
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30083242
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075628
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071646
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30084402
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071608
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30077340
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071812
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30083184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30088326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072826
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071534
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071972
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30075306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071408
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30078786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071542
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081978
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072502
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30082638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071394
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072714
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073334
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30073646
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30074876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30076594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30072326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30081042
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_12_0433252.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30071514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_12_0433252.30084392
</commentlist>
</conversation>
