<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_19_164229</id>
	<title>Respected Developers Begin Fleeing the App Store</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1258650300000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>wiedzmin writes <i>"Facebook's Joe Hewitt, Second Gear's Justin Williams, the long-time Mac software developer known as 'Rogue Amoeba' and other respected App Store developers have recently decided to discontinue their work on the platform, <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/11/joe-hewitt-developer-of-facebooks-massively-popular-iphone-app-quits-the-project/">citing their frustration with Apple's opaque approval process</a>. Continued issues with erroneous and snap rejections of applications and APIs are prompting more and more developers to <a href="http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/11/respected-developers-fleeing-from-app-store-platform.ars">shun the platform entirely</a>. Though there are tens of thousands of other developers who have pumped out over 100,000 apps for the platform, continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>wiedzmin writes " Facebook 's Joe Hewitt , Second Gear 's Justin Williams , the long-time Mac software developer known as 'Rogue Amoeba ' and other respected App Store developers have recently decided to discontinue their work on the platform , citing their frustration with Apple 's opaque approval process .
Continued issues with erroneous and snap rejections of applications and APIs are prompting more and more developers to shun the platform entirely .
Though there are tens of thousands of other developers who have pumped out over 100,000 apps for the platform , continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wiedzmin writes "Facebook's Joe Hewitt, Second Gear's Justin Williams, the long-time Mac software developer known as 'Rogue Amoeba' and other respected App Store developers have recently decided to discontinue their work on the platform, citing their frustration with Apple's opaque approval process.
Continued issues with erroneous and snap rejections of applications and APIs are prompting more and more developers to shun the platform entirely.
Though there are tens of thousands of other developers who have pumped out over 100,000 apps for the platform, continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161286</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258661580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You may be a full time developer, but your clearly not the person who works with the approval process.  Developing itself on the platform is fine, but it's the approval process that ruins the experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You may be a full time developer , but your clearly not the person who works with the approval process .
Developing itself on the platform is fine , but it 's the approval process that ruins the experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may be a full time developer, but your clearly not the person who works with the approval process.
Developing itself on the platform is fine, but it's the approval process that ruins the experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161844</id>
	<title>Re:2010 Year of the linux</title>
	<author>SCHecklerX</author>
	<datestamp>1258663320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Got it.  It's called a Palm Pre, and it's easy to customize and develop for, even if you are more of a linux sysadmin than web programmer.  Dropping an adblocking<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/hosts on it was simple, for example, as was replacing the text autoreplace and such.  Don't like the names of things, or that they are visible in Luna?  Just fire up the text editor (vi is already on the phone, as are tools like wget, etc.  Firewall is iptables, yadda yadda).  You can do all of this out of the box.  You just have to enable developer mode and connect using novaterm (novacom for the windoze users).</p><p>Still many issues (WebOS is still young), but overall I'm still loving this phone, and am excited to where palm is taking it.  Did I mention that they embrace the homebrew community, and work with them, unlike a certain other company that has some sort of multi-touch device on the market?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Got it .
It 's called a Palm Pre , and it 's easy to customize and develop for , even if you are more of a linux sysadmin than web programmer .
Dropping an adblocking /etc/hosts on it was simple , for example , as was replacing the text autoreplace and such .
Do n't like the names of things , or that they are visible in Luna ?
Just fire up the text editor ( vi is already on the phone , as are tools like wget , etc .
Firewall is iptables , yadda yadda ) .
You can do all of this out of the box .
You just have to enable developer mode and connect using novaterm ( novacom for the windoze users ) .Still many issues ( WebOS is still young ) , but overall I 'm still loving this phone , and am excited to where palm is taking it .
Did I mention that they embrace the homebrew community , and work with them , unlike a certain other company that has some sort of multi-touch device on the market ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Got it.
It's called a Palm Pre, and it's easy to customize and develop for, even if you are more of a linux sysadmin than web programmer.
Dropping an adblocking /etc/hosts on it was simple, for example, as was replacing the text autoreplace and such.
Don't like the names of things, or that they are visible in Luna?
Just fire up the text editor (vi is already on the phone, as are tools like wget, etc.
Firewall is iptables, yadda yadda).
You can do all of this out of the box.
You just have to enable developer mode and connect using novaterm (novacom for the windoze users).Still many issues (WebOS is still young), but overall I'm still loving this phone, and am excited to where palm is taking it.
Did I mention that they embrace the homebrew community, and work with them, unlike a certain other company that has some sort of multi-touch device on the market?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161052</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258660740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that you aren't even given a chance to profit in many cases anyway, regardless of app quality and despite jumping through all the hoops.</p><p>Take my own app, "The Watcher". It was approved yesterday morning but still hasn't filtered through onto any of the storefronts - it should be at least listed at the top of the puzzle section but is not in there at all, despite me matching the approval date with the launch date etc. etc. So at some point (maybe, who really knows) the game will actually be listed, but by that point will be pushed way back down the list and not noticable at all because of all the newer stuff above it.</p><p>Now it's not the best game in the world, obviously, but it's a nice version of The Sentinel and brings something a little bit different to the platform, and it took a fair amount of time to make - but why would I bother in the future when there is not even the smallest chance of it even being seen by a human being to buy? If you have the PR connections you can get placement and make some money still, i'm sure, but for the indy developer it's getting pretty frustrating out there.</p><p>Really not sure what the solution is to this though, Apple is a victim of its own success to a large extent. What I do know though is that back when I used to do shareware on download.com they would at least post your app immediately in the new list on the frontpage so you had a running chance at getting some eyeballs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that you are n't even given a chance to profit in many cases anyway , regardless of app quality and despite jumping through all the hoops.Take my own app , " The Watcher " .
It was approved yesterday morning but still has n't filtered through onto any of the storefronts - it should be at least listed at the top of the puzzle section but is not in there at all , despite me matching the approval date with the launch date etc .
etc. So at some point ( maybe , who really knows ) the game will actually be listed , but by that point will be pushed way back down the list and not noticable at all because of all the newer stuff above it.Now it 's not the best game in the world , obviously , but it 's a nice version of The Sentinel and brings something a little bit different to the platform , and it took a fair amount of time to make - but why would I bother in the future when there is not even the smallest chance of it even being seen by a human being to buy ?
If you have the PR connections you can get placement and make some money still , i 'm sure , but for the indy developer it 's getting pretty frustrating out there.Really not sure what the solution is to this though , Apple is a victim of its own success to a large extent .
What I do know though is that back when I used to do shareware on download.com they would at least post your app immediately in the new list on the frontpage so you had a running chance at getting some eyeballs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that you aren't even given a chance to profit in many cases anyway, regardless of app quality and despite jumping through all the hoops.Take my own app, "The Watcher".
It was approved yesterday morning but still hasn't filtered through onto any of the storefronts - it should be at least listed at the top of the puzzle section but is not in there at all, despite me matching the approval date with the launch date etc.
etc. So at some point (maybe, who really knows) the game will actually be listed, but by that point will be pushed way back down the list and not noticable at all because of all the newer stuff above it.Now it's not the best game in the world, obviously, but it's a nice version of The Sentinel and brings something a little bit different to the platform, and it took a fair amount of time to make - but why would I bother in the future when there is not even the smallest chance of it even being seen by a human being to buy?
If you have the PR connections you can get placement and make some money still, i'm sure, but for the indy developer it's getting pretty frustrating out there.Really not sure what the solution is to this though, Apple is a victim of its own success to a large extent.
What I do know though is that back when I used to do shareware on download.com they would at least post your app immediately in the new list on the frontpage so you had a running chance at getting some eyeballs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165586</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258632840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I predict the Facebook app will continue to be among the most popular regardless of who they have working on it. It's fucking Facebook. People will use it no matter what. No one gives a rat's ass who the developer is.</p><p>Also, the Three20 library is complete garbage. I work at a major iPhone development house and we won't touch it. We have our own internal library of reusable code built up that is much more modular and far less scary / fragile / buggy. Three20 is not only horribly written, it contains a ton of interdependencies. Want to use just one class a la carte? Too bad, you have to take 20 other classes with it or it won't even fucking build. It's crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I predict the Facebook app will continue to be among the most popular regardless of who they have working on it .
It 's fucking Facebook .
People will use it no matter what .
No one gives a rat 's ass who the developer is.Also , the Three20 library is complete garbage .
I work at a major iPhone development house and we wo n't touch it .
We have our own internal library of reusable code built up that is much more modular and far less scary / fragile / buggy .
Three20 is not only horribly written , it contains a ton of interdependencies .
Want to use just one class a la carte ?
Too bad , you have to take 20 other classes with it or it wo n't even fucking build .
It 's crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I predict the Facebook app will continue to be among the most popular regardless of who they have working on it.
It's fucking Facebook.
People will use it no matter what.
No one gives a rat's ass who the developer is.Also, the Three20 library is complete garbage.
I work at a major iPhone development house and we won't touch it.
We have our own internal library of reusable code built up that is much more modular and far less scary / fragile / buggy.
Three20 is not only horribly written, it contains a ton of interdependencies.
Want to use just one class a la carte?
Too bad, you have to take 20 other classes with it or it won't even fucking build.
It's crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158974</id>
	<title>Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Note the irony of a FaceBook employee complainng about Apple's closed system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Note the irony of a FaceBook employee complainng about Apple 's closed system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note the irony of a FaceBook employee complainng about Apple's closed system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159446</id>
	<title>Re:Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>TrancePhreak</author>
	<datestamp>1258655820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have described precisely why I chose Windows Mobile and keep a close eye on Android et al.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have described precisely why I chose Windows Mobile and keep a close eye on Android et al .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have described precisely why I chose Windows Mobile and keep a close eye on Android et al.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163560</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258625700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did: When you are at the top, the only direction to go is down.</p></div><p>I'm sure someone said the same thing back in early 2006 when "all" they had out thus far was the widely successful iPod line (including the Nano which had only just arrived), and iTunes was already a market force, not to mention their "reasonably" successful line of computers.</p><p>Of course, that was also around the time when they had just started launching Intel Macs, and the iPhone was not on most people's radars.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did : When you are at the top , the only direction to go is down.I 'm sure someone said the same thing back in early 2006 when " all " they had out thus far was the widely successful iPod line ( including the Nano which had only just arrived ) , and iTunes was already a market force , not to mention their " reasonably " successful line of computers.Of course , that was also around the time when they had just started launching Intel Macs , and the iPhone was not on most people 's radars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did: When you are at the top, the only direction to go is down.I'm sure someone said the same thing back in early 2006 when "all" they had out thus far was the widely successful iPod line (including the Nano which had only just arrived), and iTunes was already a market force, not to mention their "reasonably" successful line of computers.Of course, that was also around the time when they had just started launching Intel Macs, and the iPhone was not on most people's radars.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158960</id>
	<title>Leaving the mac store?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1258654320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's an app for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's an app for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's an app for that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158906</id>
	<title>2010 Year of the linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>cellphone</htmltext>
<tokenext>cellphone</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cellphone</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164416</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1258628160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So Windows it is then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So Windows it is then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Windows it is then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160162</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160468</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1258658940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"The only ones to "stick it out" are the ones who are the most likely to profit.</i>"
<br>
<br>
And those most likely to profit are those with deep pockets in order to promote their apps in the sea of crud. Note the last 6month's top ten apps were from Global 2000 companies. There's been a novelity app from an independent here and there, but we know there's a catch to it from Apple to heavily promote its success in order to keep developers salivating at making millions in the appstore. And if it's not a <i>marketing</i> app, your get what you pay for.... which means high quality apps will definitely see an increase in price as this exodus continues which is risk to Apple (they prefer lower price apps as in their game app initiative)..
<br>
<br>
As for me, what broke the camel's back was the $99/yr subscription and every 2.8GB download for each SDK update. Thanks, but moving to Android and Maemo. The approval process has been average for me and the profit for a indie dev has been close to non-existent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The only ones to " stick it out " are the ones who are the most likely to profit .
" And those most likely to profit are those with deep pockets in order to promote their apps in the sea of crud .
Note the last 6month 's top ten apps were from Global 2000 companies .
There 's been a novelity app from an independent here and there , but we know there 's a catch to it from Apple to heavily promote its success in order to keep developers salivating at making millions in the appstore .
And if it 's not a marketing app , your get what you pay for.... which means high quality apps will definitely see an increase in price as this exodus continues which is risk to Apple ( they prefer lower price apps as in their game app initiative ) . . As for me , what broke the camel 's back was the $ 99/yr subscription and every 2.8GB download for each SDK update .
Thanks , but moving to Android and Maemo .
The approval process has been average for me and the profit for a indie dev has been close to non-existent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The only ones to "stick it out" are the ones who are the most likely to profit.
"


And those most likely to profit are those with deep pockets in order to promote their apps in the sea of crud.
Note the last 6month's top ten apps were from Global 2000 companies.
There's been a novelity app from an independent here and there, but we know there's a catch to it from Apple to heavily promote its success in order to keep developers salivating at making millions in the appstore.
And if it's not a marketing app, your get what you pay for.... which means high quality apps will definitely see an increase in price as this exodus continues which is risk to Apple (they prefer lower price apps as in their game app initiative)..


As for me, what broke the camel's back was the $99/yr subscription and every 2.8GB download for each SDK update.
Thanks, but moving to Android and Maemo.
The approval process has been average for me and the profit for a indie dev has been close to non-existent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163776</id>
	<title>Re:2010 Year of the linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258626300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yes! I hope they all flock to Maemo to develop for the awesome Nokia N900 and its children and competitors.</p></div><p>touch resistive----pwa---pwa--pwaaaaaaah</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes !
I hope they all flock to Maemo to develop for the awesome Nokia N900 and its children and competitors.touch resistive----pwa---pwa--pwaaaaaaah</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes!
I hope they all flock to Maemo to develop for the awesome Nokia N900 and its children and competitors.touch resistive----pwa---pwa--pwaaaaaaah
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158998</id>
	<title>Implications For Future iPhone Fart Apps?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could this mean lower quality fart apps for the iPhone if all the Respected Fart App developers abandon Apple?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could this mean lower quality fart apps for the iPhone if all the Respected Fart App developers abandon Apple ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could this mean lower quality fart apps for the iPhone if all the Respected Fart App developers abandon Apple?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162304</id>
	<title>Re:So the flee ...</title>
	<author>clem</author>
	<datestamp>1258621740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is still capitalism, isn't it?</p></div><p>Only to the degree that the iPhone app store is a free market.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is still capitalism , is n't it ? Only to the degree that the iPhone app store is a free market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is still capitalism, isn't it?Only to the degree that the iPhone app store is a free market.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163584</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1258625760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I disagree.  The unprofitable applications will be unprofitable on other phones too.</p></div><p>That's not necessarily true.  Look at the whole problem with Flash. I understand why Apple doesn't want people deploying virtual machines or interpreters through the App store, because it undermines their monopoly on selling apps to users, but sometimes that's simply the most efficient way to build an app.</p><p>I once did a mobile application for humanitarian relief.   You wouldn't believe the number of wrinkles involved in something like siting a refugee camp.   I would have had *hundreds*, if not *thousands* of screens to test if I did it in the standard VB bound control style.  The only way to do it economically was to have a model driven data collection engine. That way I only had fewer than a dozen UI forms to test.   It was purely an engineering decision.</p><p>Now if I wanted to deploy that app on an iPhone, it very likely would not be allowed.   I would have had twenty times the programming and maybe a hundred times the testing to get it working in a way Apple would accept. It would not have been profitable for me to develop an application for the iPhone, even if the result looked exactly the same to the users and every humanitarian relief worker on the planet carried an iPhone.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
The unprofitable applications will be unprofitable on other phones too.That 's not necessarily true .
Look at the whole problem with Flash .
I understand why Apple does n't want people deploying virtual machines or interpreters through the App store , because it undermines their monopoly on selling apps to users , but sometimes that 's simply the most efficient way to build an app.I once did a mobile application for humanitarian relief .
You would n't believe the number of wrinkles involved in something like siting a refugee camp .
I would have had * hundreds * , if not * thousands * of screens to test if I did it in the standard VB bound control style .
The only way to do it economically was to have a model driven data collection engine .
That way I only had fewer than a dozen UI forms to test .
It was purely an engineering decision.Now if I wanted to deploy that app on an iPhone , it very likely would not be allowed .
I would have had twenty times the programming and maybe a hundred times the testing to get it working in a way Apple would accept .
It would not have been profitable for me to develop an application for the iPhone , even if the result looked exactly the same to the users and every humanitarian relief worker on the planet carried an iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
The unprofitable applications will be unprofitable on other phones too.That's not necessarily true.
Look at the whole problem with Flash.
I understand why Apple doesn't want people deploying virtual machines or interpreters through the App store, because it undermines their monopoly on selling apps to users, but sometimes that's simply the most efficient way to build an app.I once did a mobile application for humanitarian relief.
You wouldn't believe the number of wrinkles involved in something like siting a refugee camp.
I would have had *hundreds*, if not *thousands* of screens to test if I did it in the standard VB bound control style.
The only way to do it economically was to have a model driven data collection engine.
That way I only had fewer than a dozen UI forms to test.
It was purely an engineering decision.Now if I wanted to deploy that app on an iPhone, it very likely would not be allowed.
I would have had twenty times the programming and maybe a hundred times the testing to get it working in a way Apple would accept.
It would not have been profitable for me to develop an application for the iPhone, even if the result looked exactly the same to the users and every humanitarian relief worker on the planet carried an iPhone.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162702</id>
	<title>Re:I want to join in!</title>
	<author>fatboy</author>
	<datestamp>1258623060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup! You can find it in the Android Market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup !
You can find it in the Android Market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup!
You can find it in the Android Market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159532</id>
	<title>Re:Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you have a citation for your Vlingo complaint?  Vlingo is available on the iPhone and can dial numbers, search, bring up maps and update social networking status.  It can't take dictation, but it seems Vlingo has also stopped selling free dictation on the Blackberry (it now costs $17.99) so it may simply be that they haven't written it for iPhone yet.  I wasn't able to find anything about Vlingo getting rejected from the app store.  The ability for applications to send e-mail is a fully supported feature in iPhone OS 3.0+.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you have a citation for your Vlingo complaint ?
Vlingo is available on the iPhone and can dial numbers , search , bring up maps and update social networking status .
It ca n't take dictation , but it seems Vlingo has also stopped selling free dictation on the Blackberry ( it now costs $ 17.99 ) so it may simply be that they have n't written it for iPhone yet .
I was n't able to find anything about Vlingo getting rejected from the app store .
The ability for applications to send e-mail is a fully supported feature in iPhone OS 3.0 + .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you have a citation for your Vlingo complaint?
Vlingo is available on the iPhone and can dial numbers, search, bring up maps and update social networking status.
It can't take dictation, but it seems Vlingo has also stopped selling free dictation on the Blackberry (it now costs $17.99) so it may simply be that they haven't written it for iPhone yet.
I wasn't able to find anything about Vlingo getting rejected from the app store.
The ability for applications to send e-mail is a fully supported feature in iPhone OS 3.0+.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159362</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258655520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meh, my guess is that the grass is greener on Android so off they go.  From a consumer perspective, I am now planning to go to a droid or similar device when my AT&amp;T contract is up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meh , my guess is that the grass is greener on Android so off they go .
From a consumer perspective , I am now planning to go to a droid or similar device when my AT&amp;T contract is up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meh, my guess is that the grass is greener on Android so off they go.
From a consumer perspective, I am now planning to go to a droid or similar device when my AT&amp;T contract is up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163330</id>
	<title>Anecdote != Trend</title>
	<author>crmarvin42</author>
	<datestamp>1258624980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While this may be a disappointing loss it is not part of a "continued migration away from iPhone development."  A handful of high profile prima dona's are leaving out of frustration with problems that, while legitimate, are ultimately solvable for the most part.  Unless someone starts polling the iPhone development community and finds that this is consistent, then you can call it a migration.  Until then it's annecdote from a vocal minority.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While this may be a disappointing loss it is not part of a " continued migration away from iPhone development .
" A handful of high profile prima dona 's are leaving out of frustration with problems that , while legitimate , are ultimately solvable for the most part .
Unless someone starts polling the iPhone development community and finds that this is consistent , then you can call it a migration .
Until then it 's annecdote from a vocal minority .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While this may be a disappointing loss it is not part of a "continued migration away from iPhone development.
"  A handful of high profile prima dona's are leaving out of frustration with problems that, while legitimate, are ultimately solvable for the most part.
Unless someone starts polling the iPhone development community and finds that this is consistent, then you can call it a migration.
Until then it's annecdote from a vocal minority.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161152</id>
	<title>Re:Dear fleeing developers.</title>
	<author>budfields</author>
	<datestamp>1258661100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No one will tell you what you cannot do?

Um, this is obvious bullshit.

If you design something that interferes with the wrong person's profits, or might mess with the stability of the device, then that app will be disallowed just as surely on the N900 as it would be on any other cellphone, including the iPhone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No one will tell you what you can not do ?
Um , this is obvious bullshit .
If you design something that interferes with the wrong person 's profits , or might mess with the stability of the device , then that app will be disallowed just as surely on the N900 as it would be on any other cellphone , including the iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one will tell you what you cannot do?
Um, this is obvious bullshit.
If you design something that interferes with the wrong person's profits, or might mess with the stability of the device, then that app will be disallowed just as surely on the N900 as it would be on any other cellphone, including the iPhone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159386</id>
	<title>Keep posting this story til it sticks, I guess.</title>
	<author>Etone</author>
	<datestamp>1258655580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>/. has posted this same story or variants on it about three or four times in the past week. I guess keep saying it til' it's true.

<br>
btw, in regards to the headline:
"developers" in this case equals 2.
"respected" in this case means "working for a well known company" in the case of Hewitt.
"fleeing" means dramaposting and ragequitting.</htmltext>
<tokenext>/ .
has posted this same story or variants on it about three or four times in the past week .
I guess keep saying it til ' it 's true .
btw , in regards to the headline : " developers " in this case equals 2 .
" respected " in this case means " working for a well known company " in the case of Hewitt .
" fleeing " means dramaposting and ragequitting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>/.
has posted this same story or variants on it about three or four times in the past week.
I guess keep saying it til' it's true.
btw, in regards to the headline:
"developers" in this case equals 2.
"respected" in this case means "working for a well known company" in the case of Hewitt.
"fleeing" means dramaposting and ragequitting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161028</id>
	<title>Apple Rules Are Very Simple and Consistant.....</title>
	<author>Bob\_Who</author>
	<datestamp>1258660620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>....Its whatever Steve Jobs Says.  Anytime.  Autocrats and Deities make it easy for the plebes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>....Its whatever Steve Jobs Says .
Anytime. Autocrats and Deities make it easy for the plebes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....Its whatever Steve Jobs Says.
Anytime.  Autocrats and Deities make it easy for the plebes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159382</id>
	<title>Hewitt leaving, but not Facebook</title>
	<author>snowwrestler</author>
	<datestamp>1258655580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think this also has to do with the maturing of the platform. The low-hanging fruit is essentially gone, and it will get harder and harder for the free-thinking lone wolves to come up with original and compelling software that can compete. Businesses however, have the resources to continue to create more advanced and complicated iPhone versions of their products. They also have the resources to better manage the approval process, both by building carefully to the API, and (for bigger businesses) by having a phone call relationship with Apple.</p><p>Hewitt, who is undoubtedly a great and innovative developer, decided to strike out for more open pastures. Who can blame him? But the Facebook app is not going anywhere, and most likely will continue to be developed to a high quality. Over time I expect we'll see a greater mix of apps by existing software businesses, and less duplication in app functionality as more independent developers get frustrated or bored and leave.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this also has to do with the maturing of the platform .
The low-hanging fruit is essentially gone , and it will get harder and harder for the free-thinking lone wolves to come up with original and compelling software that can compete .
Businesses however , have the resources to continue to create more advanced and complicated iPhone versions of their products .
They also have the resources to better manage the approval process , both by building carefully to the API , and ( for bigger businesses ) by having a phone call relationship with Apple.Hewitt , who is undoubtedly a great and innovative developer , decided to strike out for more open pastures .
Who can blame him ?
But the Facebook app is not going anywhere , and most likely will continue to be developed to a high quality .
Over time I expect we 'll see a greater mix of apps by existing software businesses , and less duplication in app functionality as more independent developers get frustrated or bored and leave .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this also has to do with the maturing of the platform.
The low-hanging fruit is essentially gone, and it will get harder and harder for the free-thinking lone wolves to come up with original and compelling software that can compete.
Businesses however, have the resources to continue to create more advanced and complicated iPhone versions of their products.
They also have the resources to better manage the approval process, both by building carefully to the API, and (for bigger businesses) by having a phone call relationship with Apple.Hewitt, who is undoubtedly a great and innovative developer, decided to strike out for more open pastures.
Who can blame him?
But the Facebook app is not going anywhere, and most likely will continue to be developed to a high quality.
Over time I expect we'll see a greater mix of apps by existing software businesses, and less duplication in app functionality as more independent developers get frustrated or bored and leave.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161608</id>
	<title>Re:Approval vs Sales</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258662660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not true. Its only $150 commission but good point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not true .
Its only $ 150 commission but good point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not true.
Its only $150 commission but good point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161494</id>
	<title>Wanna know HOW to leave the mac store?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258662300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a map for that</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a map for that</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a map for that</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159392</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258655640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Boss: How was your trip.</p><p>Reporter: Mostly uneventful, although I spotted Joe Biden on the Amtrak before he got off at the next stop.</p><p>Boss: "RESPECTED POLITICIANS BEGIN FLEEING MASS TRANSIT!"</p><p>Reporter: Uh, I don't think he was fleeing mass transit per se, nor did it seem to be the start of any trend...</p><p>Boss: He left, didn't he?</p><p>Reporter:<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...also, I'm not sure he counts as "respected."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Boss : How was your trip.Reporter : Mostly uneventful , although I spotted Joe Biden on the Amtrak before he got off at the next stop.Boss : " RESPECTED POLITICIANS BEGIN FLEEING MASS TRANSIT !
" Reporter : Uh , I do n't think he was fleeing mass transit per se , nor did it seem to be the start of any trend...Boss : He left , did n't he ? Reporter : ...also , I 'm not sure he counts as " respected .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Boss: How was your trip.Reporter: Mostly uneventful, although I spotted Joe Biden on the Amtrak before he got off at the next stop.Boss: "RESPECTED POLITICIANS BEGIN FLEEING MASS TRANSIT!
"Reporter: Uh, I don't think he was fleeing mass transit per se, nor did it seem to be the start of any trend...Boss: He left, didn't he?Reporter: ...also, I'm not sure he counts as "respected.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30171882</id>
	<title>Respected Readers Begin Fleeing Slashdot</title>
	<author>Me! Me! 42</author>
	<datestamp>1258736340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Respected Readers Begin Fleeing Slashdot . . . <br>
. . . because of the scare headlines and FUD. <br>
What a ridiculous article and headline.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Respected Readers Begin Fleeing Slashdot .
. .
. .
. because of the scare headlines and FUD .
What a ridiculous article and headline .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Respected Readers Begin Fleeing Slashdot .
. .
. .
. because of the scare headlines and FUD.
What a ridiculous article and headline.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160046</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>KraftDinner</author>
	<datestamp>1258657620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is why there are 100,000 apps in the apps store: <a href="http://www.theappsmachine.com/iphone-news-and-rumors/this-is-why-there-are-100000-apps-in-the-app-store/" title="theappsmachine.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.theappsmachine.com/iphone-news-and-rumors/this-is-why-there-are-100000-apps-in-the-app-store/</a> [theappsmachine.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why there are 100,000 apps in the apps store : http : //www.theappsmachine.com/iphone-news-and-rumors/this-is-why-there-are-100000-apps-in-the-app-store/ [ theappsmachine.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why there are 100,000 apps in the apps store: http://www.theappsmachine.com/iphone-news-and-rumors/this-is-why-there-are-100000-apps-in-the-app-store/ [theappsmachine.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159428</id>
	<title>Re:Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>MBC1977</author>
	<datestamp>1258655820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>"... and not one that's artificially restricted due to the limited vision of people like Steve Jobs."<br> <br>

As a Windows user, I feel I should defend Apple here (though I'm certain any number of Apple users and fanboys/girls will leap to their defense).  First, I'm positively certain, Steve Jobs has more important things to do than to sit around and spot check every single application that gets run in his company's app store.  However, assuming for a minute that he does, have you stopped and considered that the application that Vlingo's application or any other developer that gets disapproved may have been disapproved for a reason...perhaps a misalignment of either company's visions? <br> <br>

Don't get me wrong, your perfectly able to choose what you want to use (I'm fairly certain you will), but one does have to consider your comments suspect when you start throwing out terms such as "limited vision" since they are not doing what YOU want them to do.  Apple doesn't create apps that I want them to do either, but I would never be so...rude, to say or accuse any particular person (e.g. Gates, Jobs, Torvalds, or even crazy RMS), of having a limited vision.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" ... and not one that 's artificially restricted due to the limited vision of people like Steve Jobs .
" As a Windows user , I feel I should defend Apple here ( though I 'm certain any number of Apple users and fanboys/girls will leap to their defense ) .
First , I 'm positively certain , Steve Jobs has more important things to do than to sit around and spot check every single application that gets run in his company 's app store .
However , assuming for a minute that he does , have you stopped and considered that the application that Vlingo 's application or any other developer that gets disapproved may have been disapproved for a reason...perhaps a misalignment of either company 's visions ?
Do n't get me wrong , your perfectly able to choose what you want to use ( I 'm fairly certain you will ) , but one does have to consider your comments suspect when you start throwing out terms such as " limited vision " since they are not doing what YOU want them to do .
Apple does n't create apps that I want them to do either , but I would never be so...rude , to say or accuse any particular person ( e.g .
Gates , Jobs , Torvalds , or even crazy RMS ) , of having a limited vision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"... and not one that's artificially restricted due to the limited vision of people like Steve Jobs.
" 

As a Windows user, I feel I should defend Apple here (though I'm certain any number of Apple users and fanboys/girls will leap to their defense).
First, I'm positively certain, Steve Jobs has more important things to do than to sit around and spot check every single application that gets run in his company's app store.
However, assuming for a minute that he does, have you stopped and considered that the application that Vlingo's application or any other developer that gets disapproved may have been disapproved for a reason...perhaps a misalignment of either company's visions?
Don't get me wrong, your perfectly able to choose what you want to use (I'm fairly certain you will), but one does have to consider your comments suspect when you start throwing out terms such as "limited vision" since they are not doing what YOU want them to do.
Apple doesn't create apps that I want them to do either, but I would never be so...rude, to say or accuse any particular person (e.g.
Gates, Jobs, Torvalds, or even crazy RMS), of having a limited vision.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159990</id>
	<title>Re:Cry wolf</title>
	<author>0xdeadbeef</author>
	<datestamp>1258657380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are you so angry?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are you so angry ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are you so angry?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161960</id>
	<title>Re:Google Voice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258663740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's fine.  You are not the market that is intended for the iPhone anyway.  The iPhone market is intended for people who actually like getting work done and having things work, rather than fiddle-faddling with sub-par stuff or trying to cobble together pieces of a hacked OS.</p><p>As for apps being rejected, if someone has yet another Tetris clone, who cares.  Expect it to be rejected because there is plenty of that on the iPhone already.  The apps that are approved for the App Store are of a known good measure of quality and safety.  Download an app from the App Store, and you know it won't suck, as opposed to other distribution means where a person is likely downloading a Trojan or botnet client to their phone instead.</p><p>The developers that are leaving the iPhone market will be back, tail between their legs.  Reason?  There isn't money to be made anywhere else.  There is no interest in an Android app store, nor a Windows Mobile app store.  This is like music stores.  Every music store except iTMS has failed miserably with only a few who are on life support from big firms.  Eventually the people that ditched the iPhone platform will get tired of being bit players and come back.</p><p>This may sound fanboyish, but the truth hurts sometimes.  There is only room for one smartphone OS and one app store.  And this place has been taken by Apple.  I'm sure others will duke it out for the 3\% market share left over by the dedicated anti-Apple extremists, but everyone else will keep with what works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's fine .
You are not the market that is intended for the iPhone anyway .
The iPhone market is intended for people who actually like getting work done and having things work , rather than fiddle-faddling with sub-par stuff or trying to cobble together pieces of a hacked OS.As for apps being rejected , if someone has yet another Tetris clone , who cares .
Expect it to be rejected because there is plenty of that on the iPhone already .
The apps that are approved for the App Store are of a known good measure of quality and safety .
Download an app from the App Store , and you know it wo n't suck , as opposed to other distribution means where a person is likely downloading a Trojan or botnet client to their phone instead.The developers that are leaving the iPhone market will be back , tail between their legs .
Reason ? There is n't money to be made anywhere else .
There is no interest in an Android app store , nor a Windows Mobile app store .
This is like music stores .
Every music store except iTMS has failed miserably with only a few who are on life support from big firms .
Eventually the people that ditched the iPhone platform will get tired of being bit players and come back.This may sound fanboyish , but the truth hurts sometimes .
There is only room for one smartphone OS and one app store .
And this place has been taken by Apple .
I 'm sure others will duke it out for the 3 \ % market share left over by the dedicated anti-Apple extremists , but everyone else will keep with what works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's fine.
You are not the market that is intended for the iPhone anyway.
The iPhone market is intended for people who actually like getting work done and having things work, rather than fiddle-faddling with sub-par stuff or trying to cobble together pieces of a hacked OS.As for apps being rejected, if someone has yet another Tetris clone, who cares.
Expect it to be rejected because there is plenty of that on the iPhone already.
The apps that are approved for the App Store are of a known good measure of quality and safety.
Download an app from the App Store, and you know it won't suck, as opposed to other distribution means where a person is likely downloading a Trojan or botnet client to their phone instead.The developers that are leaving the iPhone market will be back, tail between their legs.
Reason?  There isn't money to be made anywhere else.
There is no interest in an Android app store, nor a Windows Mobile app store.
This is like music stores.
Every music store except iTMS has failed miserably with only a few who are on life support from big firms.
Eventually the people that ditched the iPhone platform will get tired of being bit players and come back.This may sound fanboyish, but the truth hurts sometimes.
There is only room for one smartphone OS and one app store.
And this place has been taken by Apple.
I'm sure others will duke it out for the 3\% market share left over by the dedicated anti-Apple extremists, but everyone else will keep with what works.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004</id>
	<title>Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've got an iPhone and I use a Mac at work, but I certainly don't consider myself a "fanboy".  I got the iPhone in part because there were a few good apps that I wanted on my first smartphone.  However given all the bad press Apple gets over summary rejections of apps I'm very inclined to NOT buy another iPhone when I decide to get rid of this one.  There are a number of smartphone apps that I'm aware of that Apple doesn't allow on their phones for one reason or another.  My brother can dictate entire e-mails or text messages on his Blackberry using an app from a company called Vlingo.  It apparently provides high quality speech to text capabilities and integrates with almost any app on that platform.  They released an iPhone version a year ago but it's very limited in what it can do because Apple restricts things so much.  The iPhone Vlingo app is limited to Google searches and updating Twitter &amp; Facebook, and it's all apparently because of the way Apple restricts things.</p><p>If a company like Vlingo can extend the functionality of smartphones like the Blackberry, Android, etc. in ways that Apple and others never seriously considered then I'll very likely go with those phones in the future, and not one that's artificially restricted due to the limited vision of people like Steve Jobs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got an iPhone and I use a Mac at work , but I certainly do n't consider myself a " fanboy " .
I got the iPhone in part because there were a few good apps that I wanted on my first smartphone .
However given all the bad press Apple gets over summary rejections of apps I 'm very inclined to NOT buy another iPhone when I decide to get rid of this one .
There are a number of smartphone apps that I 'm aware of that Apple does n't allow on their phones for one reason or another .
My brother can dictate entire e-mails or text messages on his Blackberry using an app from a company called Vlingo .
It apparently provides high quality speech to text capabilities and integrates with almost any app on that platform .
They released an iPhone version a year ago but it 's very limited in what it can do because Apple restricts things so much .
The iPhone Vlingo app is limited to Google searches and updating Twitter &amp; Facebook , and it 's all apparently because of the way Apple restricts things.If a company like Vlingo can extend the functionality of smartphones like the Blackberry , Android , etc .
in ways that Apple and others never seriously considered then I 'll very likely go with those phones in the future , and not one that 's artificially restricted due to the limited vision of people like Steve Jobs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got an iPhone and I use a Mac at work, but I certainly don't consider myself a "fanboy".
I got the iPhone in part because there were a few good apps that I wanted on my first smartphone.
However given all the bad press Apple gets over summary rejections of apps I'm very inclined to NOT buy another iPhone when I decide to get rid of this one.
There are a number of smartphone apps that I'm aware of that Apple doesn't allow on their phones for one reason or another.
My brother can dictate entire e-mails or text messages on his Blackberry using an app from a company called Vlingo.
It apparently provides high quality speech to text capabilities and integrates with almost any app on that platform.
They released an iPhone version a year ago but it's very limited in what it can do because Apple restricts things so much.
The iPhone Vlingo app is limited to Google searches and updating Twitter &amp; Facebook, and it's all apparently because of the way Apple restricts things.If a company like Vlingo can extend the functionality of smartphones like the Blackberry, Android, etc.
in ways that Apple and others never seriously considered then I'll very likely go with those phones in the future, and not one that's artificially restricted due to the limited vision of people like Steve Jobs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161892</id>
	<title>Re:Rogue Amoeba was told why their app was rejecte</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258663500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except:</p><p>1) The RA app does not contain any of the copyrighted icons.  It requests them over the network.  A Mac replies with a Mac image.  A PC responds with a different image.  The RA app displays what the streaming box sent, using its publicly and openly documented protocol.   Should the client app be responsible for making sure that a server (the Mac sending the audio stream) *really meant* to send that icon?  Should Firefox be prevented from showing Mac icons that it gets from Apple.com?  The idea is absurd.</p><p>2) Given that the app does not include any infringing content, RA asked Apple to identify possible solutions.  Apple was silent.</p><p>3) Not only was RA's previous entry allowed, Apple allows other apps that *directly embed copyrighted images* into the store.  In fact, they are featuring the Star Wars Trench Run, which contains what should be (and has been, for other devs) a forbidden image of an iphone itself.</p><p>RA's complaints about the technical absurdity of the rejection and Apple's haphazard application of its own so-called-rules are both well founded.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except : 1 ) The RA app does not contain any of the copyrighted icons .
It requests them over the network .
A Mac replies with a Mac image .
A PC responds with a different image .
The RA app displays what the streaming box sent , using its publicly and openly documented protocol .
Should the client app be responsible for making sure that a server ( the Mac sending the audio stream ) * really meant * to send that icon ?
Should Firefox be prevented from showing Mac icons that it gets from Apple.com ?
The idea is absurd.2 ) Given that the app does not include any infringing content , RA asked Apple to identify possible solutions .
Apple was silent.3 ) Not only was RA 's previous entry allowed , Apple allows other apps that * directly embed copyrighted images * into the store .
In fact , they are featuring the Star Wars Trench Run , which contains what should be ( and has been , for other devs ) a forbidden image of an iphone itself.RA 's complaints about the technical absurdity of the rejection and Apple 's haphazard application of its own so-called-rules are both well founded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except:1) The RA app does not contain any of the copyrighted icons.
It requests them over the network.
A Mac replies with a Mac image.
A PC responds with a different image.
The RA app displays what the streaming box sent, using its publicly and openly documented protocol.
Should the client app be responsible for making sure that a server (the Mac sending the audio stream) *really meant* to send that icon?
Should Firefox be prevented from showing Mac icons that it gets from Apple.com?
The idea is absurd.2) Given that the app does not include any infringing content, RA asked Apple to identify possible solutions.
Apple was silent.3) Not only was RA's previous entry allowed, Apple allows other apps that *directly embed copyrighted images* into the store.
In fact, they are featuring the Star Wars Trench Run, which contains what should be (and has been, for other devs) a forbidden image of an iphone itself.RA's complaints about the technical absurdity of the rejection and Apple's haphazard application of its own so-called-rules are both well founded.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514</id>
	<title>Approval vs Sales</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've had no problems with approvals.  In fact, my last updates were approved in less than a week (for both the full and free versions).</p><p>What has surprised me is that sales have not been as good as expected, considering the app was featured on the first page of the "What's Hot" in iTunes Games for weeks, and peaked at #6 in Adventure in the USA (for a comparison, The Secret of Monkey Island peaked at #4 in Adventure).</p><p>We've placed better than many well established franchises.  So assuming there is any correlation whatsoever between the top 100 charts and sales then a lot of big publishers are losing money.</p><p>So if developers are leaving the platform it is because:<br>* Competition is so fierce that the pie is cut very thin, resulting in low sales for the vast majority of apps.<br>* Piracy is rampant, and Apple is not doing anything to resolve the issue. Google search results for our app was showing 4-5 hits on the first page of pirate sites providing cracked versions of our app. I've never seen piracy so prevalent and mainstream as it is for iPhone. Back in the Pocket PC days we had to search very thoroughly to find pirated versions of our apps - usually in the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ru TLDs. Now they are front and center.<br>* Free. A typical end user could "live" off of free apps alone and satisfy months of gaming just playing the free / lite versions of apps.  I have around 60 games on my development iPod.  All are free versions except for 1, because it was the only game that I wanted to purchase after playing the free levels. So the current market scenario of the iPhone is resulting in such a tremendous amount of free content that instead of users buying full versions, they seem to simply seek out other free games when they tire of or have played through a lite version.<br>* Platform is limited. There is only so much that can be done without a D-Pad. This is why Carmack produced Doom on rails instead of an actual FPS type game. I have yet to play any game originally built around physical controls that transferred to iPhone in an acceptable manner. The really good games for iPhone are games designed around a touch screen, and not a port or modification of a game to try and make it use multitouch, accelerometer, etc.<br>* 95\% of the foreign markets are a joke.  We were the #1 Paid App, #1 Paid Game, and #1 in the sub categories for a number of foreign markets and only sold around a dozen copies a day in those markets. Totally pointless, especially considering you have to have $250 in commission in a single country for Apple to pay out the developer's share.</p><p>Finally, the article doesn't actually bash the approval process, as far as being opaque, or taking too long, or the developer having any difficulty getting apps approved.  The developer states "I am philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process. I am very concerned that they are setting a horrible precedent for other software platforms, and soon gatekeepers will start infesting the lives of every software developer.". In other words he wants all platforms to be open, like Windows, Linux, OS X, Windows Mobile, Blackberry, etc. I tend to agree, but it is also true that most platforms have certification processes in place to brand, promote or sell applications within certain market spaces. Essentially all iPhone Apps are represented by Apple and sold in iTunes, whereas with other platforms (like Blackberry) only developers that specifically submit their apps for the "official" store have to go through an approval process.</p><p>So again, I don't think this is as much about the difficulty of getting an app approved, but simply that the developer has to seek approval in the first place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had no problems with approvals .
In fact , my last updates were approved in less than a week ( for both the full and free versions ) .What has surprised me is that sales have not been as good as expected , considering the app was featured on the first page of the " What 's Hot " in iTunes Games for weeks , and peaked at # 6 in Adventure in the USA ( for a comparison , The Secret of Monkey Island peaked at # 4 in Adventure ) .We 've placed better than many well established franchises .
So assuming there is any correlation whatsoever between the top 100 charts and sales then a lot of big publishers are losing money.So if developers are leaving the platform it is because : * Competition is so fierce that the pie is cut very thin , resulting in low sales for the vast majority of apps .
* Piracy is rampant , and Apple is not doing anything to resolve the issue .
Google search results for our app was showing 4-5 hits on the first page of pirate sites providing cracked versions of our app .
I 've never seen piracy so prevalent and mainstream as it is for iPhone .
Back in the Pocket PC days we had to search very thoroughly to find pirated versions of our apps - usually in the .ru TLDs .
Now they are front and center .
* Free .
A typical end user could " live " off of free apps alone and satisfy months of gaming just playing the free / lite versions of apps .
I have around 60 games on my development iPod .
All are free versions except for 1 , because it was the only game that I wanted to purchase after playing the free levels .
So the current market scenario of the iPhone is resulting in such a tremendous amount of free content that instead of users buying full versions , they seem to simply seek out other free games when they tire of or have played through a lite version .
* Platform is limited .
There is only so much that can be done without a D-Pad .
This is why Carmack produced Doom on rails instead of an actual FPS type game .
I have yet to play any game originally built around physical controls that transferred to iPhone in an acceptable manner .
The really good games for iPhone are games designed around a touch screen , and not a port or modification of a game to try and make it use multitouch , accelerometer , etc .
* 95 \ % of the foreign markets are a joke .
We were the # 1 Paid App , # 1 Paid Game , and # 1 in the sub categories for a number of foreign markets and only sold around a dozen copies a day in those markets .
Totally pointless , especially considering you have to have $ 250 in commission in a single country for Apple to pay out the developer 's share.Finally , the article does n't actually bash the approval process , as far as being opaque , or taking too long , or the developer having any difficulty getting apps approved .
The developer states " I am philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process .
I am very concerned that they are setting a horrible precedent for other software platforms , and soon gatekeepers will start infesting the lives of every software developer. " .
In other words he wants all platforms to be open , like Windows , Linux , OS X , Windows Mobile , Blackberry , etc .
I tend to agree , but it is also true that most platforms have certification processes in place to brand , promote or sell applications within certain market spaces .
Essentially all iPhone Apps are represented by Apple and sold in iTunes , whereas with other platforms ( like Blackberry ) only developers that specifically submit their apps for the " official " store have to go through an approval process.So again , I do n't think this is as much about the difficulty of getting an app approved , but simply that the developer has to seek approval in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had no problems with approvals.
In fact, my last updates were approved in less than a week (for both the full and free versions).What has surprised me is that sales have not been as good as expected, considering the app was featured on the first page of the "What's Hot" in iTunes Games for weeks, and peaked at #6 in Adventure in the USA (for a comparison, The Secret of Monkey Island peaked at #4 in Adventure).We've placed better than many well established franchises.
So assuming there is any correlation whatsoever between the top 100 charts and sales then a lot of big publishers are losing money.So if developers are leaving the platform it is because:* Competition is so fierce that the pie is cut very thin, resulting in low sales for the vast majority of apps.
* Piracy is rampant, and Apple is not doing anything to resolve the issue.
Google search results for our app was showing 4-5 hits on the first page of pirate sites providing cracked versions of our app.
I've never seen piracy so prevalent and mainstream as it is for iPhone.
Back in the Pocket PC days we had to search very thoroughly to find pirated versions of our apps - usually in the .ru TLDs.
Now they are front and center.
* Free.
A typical end user could "live" off of free apps alone and satisfy months of gaming just playing the free / lite versions of apps.
I have around 60 games on my development iPod.
All are free versions except for 1, because it was the only game that I wanted to purchase after playing the free levels.
So the current market scenario of the iPhone is resulting in such a tremendous amount of free content that instead of users buying full versions, they seem to simply seek out other free games when they tire of or have played through a lite version.
* Platform is limited.
There is only so much that can be done without a D-Pad.
This is why Carmack produced Doom on rails instead of an actual FPS type game.
I have yet to play any game originally built around physical controls that transferred to iPhone in an acceptable manner.
The really good games for iPhone are games designed around a touch screen, and not a port or modification of a game to try and make it use multitouch, accelerometer, etc.
* 95\% of the foreign markets are a joke.
We were the #1 Paid App, #1 Paid Game, and #1 in the sub categories for a number of foreign markets and only sold around a dozen copies a day in those markets.
Totally pointless, especially considering you have to have $250 in commission in a single country for Apple to pay out the developer's share.Finally, the article doesn't actually bash the approval process, as far as being opaque, or taking too long, or the developer having any difficulty getting apps approved.
The developer states "I am philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process.
I am very concerned that they are setting a horrible precedent for other software platforms, and soon gatekeepers will start infesting the lives of every software developer.".
In other words he wants all platforms to be open, like Windows, Linux, OS X, Windows Mobile, Blackberry, etc.
I tend to agree, but it is also true that most platforms have certification processes in place to brand, promote or sell applications within certain market spaces.
Essentially all iPhone Apps are represented by Apple and sold in iTunes, whereas with other platforms (like Blackberry) only developers that specifically submit their apps for the "official" store have to go through an approval process.So again, I don't think this is as much about the difficulty of getting an app approved, but simply that the developer has to seek approval in the first place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164360</id>
	<title>Re:So the flee ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258627920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think that is part of the problem. There is very little money to be made in the app store and with the chance of rejection the risk far outweighs the potentially small profit to be made.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that is part of the problem .
There is very little money to be made in the app store and with the chance of rejection the risk far outweighs the potentially small profit to be made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that is part of the problem.
There is very little money to be made in the app store and with the chance of rejection the risk far outweighs the potentially small profit to be made.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160344</id>
	<title>Approval not the problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258658520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My apps always get approved in the 14 day time frame which is typical for most developers.</p><p>What has changed though, is not all new and all updated apps are not displayed in the new release list starting about two weeks ago. So, for small developers, there is essentially no visibility for your product. The only other lists represent the top 100 or hand picked apps by Apple. That might represent about 2\% of all apps and are now dominated by large corps. Essentially, 75\% of all apps now get no visibility or sales.</p><p>Most users buy on the phone while on the go in a mobile environment. So, alternative forms of marketing are limited.</p><p>Expect more small developers to be leaving the platform. btw, I don't see android as an alternative -- sales are abysmal over there. Sad because the iPhone is a great platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My apps always get approved in the 14 day time frame which is typical for most developers.What has changed though , is not all new and all updated apps are not displayed in the new release list starting about two weeks ago .
So , for small developers , there is essentially no visibility for your product .
The only other lists represent the top 100 or hand picked apps by Apple .
That might represent about 2 \ % of all apps and are now dominated by large corps .
Essentially , 75 \ % of all apps now get no visibility or sales.Most users buy on the phone while on the go in a mobile environment .
So , alternative forms of marketing are limited.Expect more small developers to be leaving the platform .
btw , I do n't see android as an alternative -- sales are abysmal over there .
Sad because the iPhone is a great platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My apps always get approved in the 14 day time frame which is typical for most developers.What has changed though, is not all new and all updated apps are not displayed in the new release list starting about two weeks ago.
So, for small developers, there is essentially no visibility for your product.
The only other lists represent the top 100 or hand picked apps by Apple.
That might represent about 2\% of all apps and are now dominated by large corps.
Essentially, 75\% of all apps now get no visibility or sales.Most users buy on the phone while on the go in a mobile environment.
So, alternative forms of marketing are limited.Expect more small developers to be leaving the platform.
btw, I don't see android as an alternative -- sales are abysmal over there.
Sad because the iPhone is a great platform.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166338</id>
	<title>Re:I want to join in!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258636200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, it is called Android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it is called Android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it is called Android.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161730</id>
	<title>Re:Dear fleeing developers.</title>
	<author>nasch</author>
	<datestamp>1258662960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then again, <a href="http://news.google.com/news?sourceid=chrome&amp;q=n900&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;hl=en&amp;ei=-5wFS9\_gHcSonQfviIXLCw&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=news\_group&amp;ct=title&amp;resnum=1&amp;ved=0CBQQsQQwAA" title="google.com">maybe you can</a> [google.com].  (the CNN article is from January, but various news sources report today that it is available in the US)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then again , maybe you can [ google.com ] .
( the CNN article is from January , but various news sources report today that it is available in the US )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then again, maybe you can [google.com].
(the CNN article is from January, but various news sources report today that it is available in the US)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160222</id>
	<title>Re:That's not the biggest problem...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258658100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parent is correct.  If I push out apps for Windows Mobile or BlackBerry, I can sign apps with keys provided to me (by Microsoft and RIM) and they can run on any Windows Mobile or BlackBerry device.  I don't need to provide them through the AppStore.</p><p>With Apple's iPhone, there are two ways for my apps to run on devices:</p><p>a) Submit the app to Apple's App Store and hope that it gets approved, or</p><p>b) Locally sign the app and add *each individual iPhone device ID that I want to be able to run the app, up to a maximum of 200.*</p><p>Neither (a) nor (b) are enterprise solutions.  These days, as cool as the iPhone interface is, I'm hoping it dies since the application distribution model is so bone-headedly stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Parent is correct .
If I push out apps for Windows Mobile or BlackBerry , I can sign apps with keys provided to me ( by Microsoft and RIM ) and they can run on any Windows Mobile or BlackBerry device .
I do n't need to provide them through the AppStore.With Apple 's iPhone , there are two ways for my apps to run on devices : a ) Submit the app to Apple 's App Store and hope that it gets approved , orb ) Locally sign the app and add * each individual iPhone device ID that I want to be able to run the app , up to a maximum of 200 .
* Neither ( a ) nor ( b ) are enterprise solutions .
These days , as cool as the iPhone interface is , I 'm hoping it dies since the application distribution model is so bone-headedly stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parent is correct.
If I push out apps for Windows Mobile or BlackBerry, I can sign apps with keys provided to me (by Microsoft and RIM) and they can run on any Windows Mobile or BlackBerry device.
I don't need to provide them through the AppStore.With Apple's iPhone, there are two ways for my apps to run on devices:a) Submit the app to Apple's App Store and hope that it gets approved, orb) Locally sign the app and add *each individual iPhone device ID that I want to be able to run the app, up to a maximum of 200.
*Neither (a) nor (b) are enterprise solutions.
These days, as cool as the iPhone interface is, I'm hoping it dies since the application distribution model is so bone-headedly stupid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159206</id>
	<title>Android</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258655040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With the increasing number of smartphone running Android, I think many developers are shifting toward the new platform, maybe some going for Maemo 5 too. There may be some greater benefits to release software with Google rather than Apple. If any expert could give a quick comparison... Perhaps Google and Nokia even contact the top developers directly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With the increasing number of smartphone running Android , I think many developers are shifting toward the new platform , maybe some going for Maemo 5 too .
There may be some greater benefits to release software with Google rather than Apple .
If any expert could give a quick comparison... Perhaps Google and Nokia even contact the top developers directly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the increasing number of smartphone running Android, I think many developers are shifting toward the new platform, maybe some going for Maemo 5 too.
There may be some greater benefits to release software with Google rather than Apple.
If any expert could give a quick comparison... Perhaps Google and Nokia even contact the top developers directly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159686</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>Silentknyght</author>
	<datestamp>1258656660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...and many rejected apps get through with a few simple changes...</p></div><p>FTFA, Rogue Amoeba's issue was with a rejection to an update to their existing application, though the rejection itself had nothing to do with the proposed change.  Instead, Apple decided that features in its existing, approved version are now a problem.</p><p>Apple's problem is that they have put a guard on the gate to enter their walled garden, except there are thousands of gates each with their own, different guard, and apparently only the vaguest of ideals are guiding their decision-making.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and many rejected apps get through with a few simple changes...FTFA , Rogue Amoeba 's issue was with a rejection to an update to their existing application , though the rejection itself had nothing to do with the proposed change .
Instead , Apple decided that features in its existing , approved version are now a problem.Apple 's problem is that they have put a guard on the gate to enter their walled garden , except there are thousands of gates each with their own , different guard , and apparently only the vaguest of ideals are guiding their decision-making .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and many rejected apps get through with a few simple changes...FTFA, Rogue Amoeba's issue was with a rejection to an update to their existing application, though the rejection itself had nothing to do with the proposed change.
Instead, Apple decided that features in its existing, approved version are now a problem.Apple's problem is that they have put a guard on the gate to enter their walled garden, except there are thousands of gates each with their own, different guard, and apparently only the vaguest of ideals are guiding their decision-making.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159714</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1258656720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But Joe lost any right to complain when he abandoned the people that relied on his expert judgment in the creation of a framework.</p></div><p>I was sort of with you until there.  Why does this guy have an obligation to help everyone who can't figure it out themselves?  Why is the developer community entitled to his knowledge and experience?  If he was upset at how Apple is controlling things then he has every right to take his toys and go home, and complain about it all the way home.  Developers who can't do things themselves have no automatic entitlement to anyone else's expertise, his guidance is given purely on a volunteer basis, and he's completely allowed to stop volunteering his expertise whenever he wants to, for any reason.</p><p>If I was a knowledgeable member of an extremely locked-down development community where everyone else felt entitled to my knowledge, I would probably leave also and find people who appreciate what I do a little bit more.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But Joe lost any right to complain when he abandoned the people that relied on his expert judgment in the creation of a framework.I was sort of with you until there .
Why does this guy have an obligation to help everyone who ca n't figure it out themselves ?
Why is the developer community entitled to his knowledge and experience ?
If he was upset at how Apple is controlling things then he has every right to take his toys and go home , and complain about it all the way home .
Developers who ca n't do things themselves have no automatic entitlement to anyone else 's expertise , his guidance is given purely on a volunteer basis , and he 's completely allowed to stop volunteering his expertise whenever he wants to , for any reason.If I was a knowledgeable member of an extremely locked-down development community where everyone else felt entitled to my knowledge , I would probably leave also and find people who appreciate what I do a little bit more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But Joe lost any right to complain when he abandoned the people that relied on his expert judgment in the creation of a framework.I was sort of with you until there.
Why does this guy have an obligation to help everyone who can't figure it out themselves?
Why is the developer community entitled to his knowledge and experience?
If he was upset at how Apple is controlling things then he has every right to take his toys and go home, and complain about it all the way home.
Developers who can't do things themselves have no automatic entitlement to anyone else's expertise, his guidance is given purely on a volunteer basis, and he's completely allowed to stop volunteering his expertise whenever he wants to, for any reason.If I was a knowledgeable member of an extremely locked-down development community where everyone else felt entitled to my knowledge, I would probably leave also and find people who appreciate what I do a little bit more.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159862</id>
	<title>Re:100k apps?</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1258657080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>most are crap, a lot are nice</p><p>programming reference cards, vmware management tools, sql management tools, networking utilities, etc</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>most are crap , a lot are niceprogramming reference cards , vmware management tools , sql management tools , networking utilities , etc</tokentext>
<sentencetext>most are crap, a lot are niceprogramming reference cards, vmware management tools, sql management tools, networking utilities, etc</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164302</id>
	<title>Capricious and arbitrary</title>
	<author>ConfusedVorlon</author>
	<datestamp>1258627800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly - I spent a couple of weeks and a reasonable amount of money to develop a small app that I thought was useful. Not million-dollar, but useful.</p><p>Many months later, apple rejected it. A nice chap called me up. I'm not breaking any rules, it isn't offensive or bad taste. It's just a utility that they don't want.</p><p>He said that he felt bad - but that there it was.</p><p>It certainly makes me think twice about investing time or money in any idea that is at all innovative in the way that it uses the platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly - I spent a couple of weeks and a reasonable amount of money to develop a small app that I thought was useful .
Not million-dollar , but useful.Many months later , apple rejected it .
A nice chap called me up .
I 'm not breaking any rules , it is n't offensive or bad taste .
It 's just a utility that they do n't want.He said that he felt bad - but that there it was.It certainly makes me think twice about investing time or money in any idea that is at all innovative in the way that it uses the platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly - I spent a couple of weeks and a reasonable amount of money to develop a small app that I thought was useful.
Not million-dollar, but useful.Many months later, apple rejected it.
A nice chap called me up.
I'm not breaking any rules, it isn't offensive or bad taste.
It's just a utility that they don't want.He said that he felt bad - but that there it was.It certainly makes me think twice about investing time or money in any idea that is at all innovative in the way that it uses the platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160162</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30169352</id>
	<title>I am appalled...</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1258714200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.... that there are people actually trying to justify application approval.</p><p>Jobs does it, it is fine and dandy.</p><p>If Microsoft did it, their monopolistic abusing ass would be kicked by everyone and his dog, including government regulatory agencies.</p><p>The iPhone is just a highly connected micro computer, it is immoral and against the best traditions in the IT industry that people need to get permission in order to develop applications for the device.</p><p>I wish people would stop defending this unethical behaviour.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.... that there are people actually trying to justify application approval.Jobs does it , it is fine and dandy.If Microsoft did it , their monopolistic abusing ass would be kicked by everyone and his dog , including government regulatory agencies.The iPhone is just a highly connected micro computer , it is immoral and against the best traditions in the IT industry that people need to get permission in order to develop applications for the device.I wish people would stop defending this unethical behaviour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.... that there are people actually trying to justify application approval.Jobs does it, it is fine and dandy.If Microsoft did it, their monopolistic abusing ass would be kicked by everyone and his dog, including government regulatory agencies.The iPhone is just a highly connected micro computer, it is immoral and against the best traditions in the IT industry that people need to get permission in order to develop applications for the device.I wish people would stop defending this unethical behaviour.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159614</id>
	<title>Truly Open Source Phone</title>
	<author>crhylove</author>
	<datestamp>1258656480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can we PLEASE just have a truly open source phone yet?  This is FOSS's chance to beat out the big crap corporations.  AGAIN.  Let's not drop the ball this time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can we PLEASE just have a truly open source phone yet ?
This is FOSS 's chance to beat out the big crap corporations .
AGAIN. Let 's not drop the ball this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can we PLEASE just have a truly open source phone yet?
This is FOSS's chance to beat out the big crap corporations.
AGAIN.  Let's not drop the ball this time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30167738</id>
	<title>Re:Apple enforcement not unpredictable, allowance</title>
	<author>stuboogie</author>
	<datestamp>1258648200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"But again Apple has only been really unpredictable with what they have allowed - not with what they have denied"<br> <br>
WTF??? Did you actually read what you typed???<br> <br>
You are saying the same thing as the AC only in a different way, but telling him he's wrong.<br> <br>
Is the glass half full or half empty?<br> <br>
Same meaning, different wording.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" But again Apple has only been really unpredictable with what they have allowed - not with what they have denied " WTF ? ? ?
Did you actually read what you typed ? ? ?
You are saying the same thing as the AC only in a different way , but telling him he 's wrong .
Is the glass half full or half empty ?
Same meaning , different wording .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"But again Apple has only been really unpredictable with what they have allowed - not with what they have denied" 
WTF???
Did you actually read what you typed???
You are saying the same thing as the AC only in a different way, but telling him he's wrong.
Is the glass half full or half empty?
Same meaning, different wording.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160088</id>
	<title>Re:Approval vs Sales</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1258657740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i get a daily email alert with 20-50 apps that are free for a day to a few weeks for marketing purposes. there are also apps and websites that scan the app store and will alert you for price drops, any apps that have gone free that day, drops in prices, etc</p><p>i'm up to over 300 apps, mostly games and i haven't played most of them. i download them for later use. i got a ton of photography apps that way as well most of which i haven't got around to trying yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i get a daily email alert with 20-50 apps that are free for a day to a few weeks for marketing purposes .
there are also apps and websites that scan the app store and will alert you for price drops , any apps that have gone free that day , drops in prices , etci 'm up to over 300 apps , mostly games and i have n't played most of them .
i download them for later use .
i got a ton of photography apps that way as well most of which i have n't got around to trying yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i get a daily email alert with 20-50 apps that are free for a day to a few weeks for marketing purposes.
there are also apps and websites that scan the app store and will alert you for price drops, any apps that have gone free that day, drops in prices, etci'm up to over 300 apps, mostly games and i haven't played most of them.
i download them for later use.
i got a ton of photography apps that way as well most of which i haven't got around to trying yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163346</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>pohl</author>
	<datestamp>1258625040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everybody take note that the defense is not claiming that their garden has no walls, but is only claiming that they are not made of the same material.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everybody take note that the defense is not claiming that their garden has no walls , but is only claiming that they are not made of the same material .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everybody take note that the defense is not claiming that their garden has no walls, but is only claiming that they are not made of the same material.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159780</id>
	<title>Re:Thank God I own a Blackberry</title>
	<author>jcr</author>
	<datestamp>1258656900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> I can purchase whatever apps I want from whomever I want.</i></p><p>Sure!  Dozens  of them.</p><p>-jcr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can purchase whatever apps I want from whomever I want.Sure !
Dozens of them.-jcr</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I can purchase whatever apps I want from whomever I want.Sure!
Dozens  of them.-jcr</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159420</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161086</id>
	<title>That might actually be a good thing...</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1258660920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A rejected-app-of-the-day app, or an Android-app-of-the-day app, so iPhone users can see what they're missing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A rejected-app-of-the-day app , or an Android-app-of-the-day app , so iPhone users can see what they 're missing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A rejected-app-of-the-day app, or an Android-app-of-the-day app, so iPhone users can see what they're missing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30168126</id>
	<title>Re:Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>quadelirus</author>
	<datestamp>1258652340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For me the biggest problem is the arbitrariness of the rules as they are applied. For instance, Hewitt (mentioned in the article) has a great library called Three20 for doing a lot of common tasks. I use it in my apps for the photo browser module, since Apple seems to have forgotten to add one to the SDK.
<br> <br>
Many of my apps use Three20 as do many in the app store, but ONE of my apps got denied because there is a function in the Three20 library that is never even called by my app or by any other method in the Three20 library that calls some unpublished APIs. Note here the problem: many apps have been approved with the same code that Apple objected to. Because the "laws" aren't applied universally the whole process is made exponentially more frustrating. (Of course I hacked out the problem function from my local version of the Three20 library and successfully resubmitted, but it is stuff like this that drives a developer nuts.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>For me the biggest problem is the arbitrariness of the rules as they are applied .
For instance , Hewitt ( mentioned in the article ) has a great library called Three20 for doing a lot of common tasks .
I use it in my apps for the photo browser module , since Apple seems to have forgotten to add one to the SDK .
Many of my apps use Three20 as do many in the app store , but ONE of my apps got denied because there is a function in the Three20 library that is never even called by my app or by any other method in the Three20 library that calls some unpublished APIs .
Note here the problem : many apps have been approved with the same code that Apple objected to .
Because the " laws " are n't applied universally the whole process is made exponentially more frustrating .
( Of course I hacked out the problem function from my local version of the Three20 library and successfully resubmitted , but it is stuff like this that drives a developer nuts .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For me the biggest problem is the arbitrariness of the rules as they are applied.
For instance, Hewitt (mentioned in the article) has a great library called Three20 for doing a lot of common tasks.
I use it in my apps for the photo browser module, since Apple seems to have forgotten to add one to the SDK.
Many of my apps use Three20 as do many in the app store, but ONE of my apps got denied because there is a function in the Three20 library that is never even called by my app or by any other method in the Three20 library that calls some unpublished APIs.
Note here the problem: many apps have been approved with the same code that Apple objected to.
Because the "laws" aren't applied universally the whole process is made exponentially more frustrating.
(Of course I hacked out the problem function from my local version of the Three20 library and successfully resubmitted, but it is stuff like this that drives a developer nuts.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040</id>
	<title>Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1258654500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a full time iPhone developer.  I'm going no-where.</p><p>I find Joe Hewitt's whining to be maddening.  He made a very popular iPhone library (the Three20 project) and knowingly used some private API's inside - as far as I can tell without anyone knowing.  Then when it turned out Apple started looking to see what symbols your code was using in an extra step to enforce this, Joe basically abandoned the community and decided to quit.</p><p>The sad part is that he didn't even need to use them.  There are multiple <a href="http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&amp;rls=en&amp;q=Three20+private+API&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;oe=UTF-8" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">forks</a> [google.com] of Three20 now that fix the use of the private API's with no loss in functionality.</p><p>The other guys, they have more of a reason to be angry although apps rejected continue to be a pretty minor aspect of things, and many rejected apps get through with a few simple changes.  But Joe lost any right to complain when he abandoned the people that relied on his expert judgment in the creation of a framework.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a full time iPhone developer .
I 'm going no-where.I find Joe Hewitt 's whining to be maddening .
He made a very popular iPhone library ( the Three20 project ) and knowingly used some private API 's inside - as far as I can tell without anyone knowing .
Then when it turned out Apple started looking to see what symbols your code was using in an extra step to enforce this , Joe basically abandoned the community and decided to quit.The sad part is that he did n't even need to use them .
There are multiple forks [ google.com ] of Three20 now that fix the use of the private API 's with no loss in functionality.The other guys , they have more of a reason to be angry although apps rejected continue to be a pretty minor aspect of things , and many rejected apps get through with a few simple changes .
But Joe lost any right to complain when he abandoned the people that relied on his expert judgment in the creation of a framework .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a full time iPhone developer.
I'm going no-where.I find Joe Hewitt's whining to be maddening.
He made a very popular iPhone library (the Three20 project) and knowingly used some private API's inside - as far as I can tell without anyone knowing.
Then when it turned out Apple started looking to see what symbols your code was using in an extra step to enforce this, Joe basically abandoned the community and decided to quit.The sad part is that he didn't even need to use them.
There are multiple forks [google.com] of Three20 now that fix the use of the private API's with no loss in functionality.The other guys, they have more of a reason to be angry although apps rejected continue to be a pretty minor aspect of things, and many rejected apps get through with a few simple changes.
But Joe lost any right to complain when he abandoned the people that relied on his expert judgment in the creation of a framework.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164902</id>
	<title>I 'am pc and I cost $1000 less with a better video</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1258629960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I 'am pc and I cost $1000 less with a much better video card, and x2 the ram also I can run your same os with a few hacks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'am pc and I cost $ 1000 less with a much better video card , and x2 the ram also I can run your same os with a few hacks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I 'am pc and I cost $1000 less with a much better video card, and x2 the ram also I can run your same os with a few hacks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166856</id>
	<title>Re:I want to join in!</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1258639140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I sent mine in but its been pending for 16months. Pretty sure they'll disallow it because the UI doesn't match nicely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I sent mine in but its been pending for 16months .
Pretty sure they 'll disallow it because the UI does n't match nicely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sent mine in but its been pending for 16months.
Pretty sure they'll disallow it because the UI doesn't match nicely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159294</id>
	<title>Google Voice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258655340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love my iphone, but I'm going to get a nice Android phone when my contract is up because I'm tired of Apple putting its own design philosophy and profit motives over my preferences as a consumer.  Their rejection of the Google Voice app was bs, plain and simple.  I like Google Voice, and I want to use it as easily as possible.  Their meddling in the app store prevents me, the user and customer, from doing this.<br>I wonder what other great, useful Apps are being turned down because Apple thinks they will "ruin the user experience" or "confuse the user."<br>Imagine if Microsoft tried to tell people what software they could and couldn't put on their PC's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love my iphone , but I 'm going to get a nice Android phone when my contract is up because I 'm tired of Apple putting its own design philosophy and profit motives over my preferences as a consumer .
Their rejection of the Google Voice app was bs , plain and simple .
I like Google Voice , and I want to use it as easily as possible .
Their meddling in the app store prevents me , the user and customer , from doing this.I wonder what other great , useful Apps are being turned down because Apple thinks they will " ruin the user experience " or " confuse the user .
" Imagine if Microsoft tried to tell people what software they could and could n't put on their PC 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love my iphone, but I'm going to get a nice Android phone when my contract is up because I'm tired of Apple putting its own design philosophy and profit motives over my preferences as a consumer.
Their rejection of the Google Voice app was bs, plain and simple.
I like Google Voice, and I want to use it as easily as possible.
Their meddling in the app store prevents me, the user and customer, from doing this.I wonder what other great, useful Apps are being turned down because Apple thinks they will "ruin the user experience" or "confuse the user.
"Imagine if Microsoft tried to tell people what software they could and couldn't put on their PC's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159542</id>
	<title>Add to that the greedy money grab by apple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just for listing on their 'app store', they take a shockingly greedy percentage. I really hate the whole controlling attitude of apple, and their totally locked-in monoculture, where it is totally forbidden to Think Different, and if you do, Apple lawyers will soon declare a fatwa, and hunt any infidel down, before legally torturing them in the court of death.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just for listing on their 'app store ' , they take a shockingly greedy percentage .
I really hate the whole controlling attitude of apple , and their totally locked-in monoculture , where it is totally forbidden to Think Different , and if you do , Apple lawyers will soon declare a fatwa , and hunt any infidel down , before legally torturing them in the court of death .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just for listing on their 'app store', they take a shockingly greedy percentage.
I really hate the whole controlling attitude of apple, and their totally locked-in monoculture, where it is totally forbidden to Think Different, and if you do, Apple lawyers will soon declare a fatwa, and hunt any infidel down, before legally torturing them in the court of death.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160542</id>
	<title>Did the article miss something?</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1258659120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TFA title is a bit over reaching. To make matters worse, the guy handed the app over to someone else to continue development in the App store.</p><p>The second link lists 3 that are leaving. This doesn't strike me as the same as rats leaving a sinking ship.</p><p>There are thousands of developers lined up behind them.</p><p>Yes the approval process sucks, and yes it needs improvement. To be fair, they are making it <a href="http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2009/11/app\_store\_approval\_to\_be\_more\_transparent.html" title="ubergizmo.com">more transparent</a> [ubergizmo.com]. They are also still swamped with submissions meaning there are still way to many developers submitting apps. The 'not so great' developers that we end up with tomorrow will hopefully be great developers in a couple of years.</p><p>IMO, the app store is too much like Steam. It's too easy and convenient, all around, to fail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA title is a bit over reaching .
To make matters worse , the guy handed the app over to someone else to continue development in the App store.The second link lists 3 that are leaving .
This does n't strike me as the same as rats leaving a sinking ship.There are thousands of developers lined up behind them.Yes the approval process sucks , and yes it needs improvement .
To be fair , they are making it more transparent [ ubergizmo.com ] .
They are also still swamped with submissions meaning there are still way to many developers submitting apps .
The 'not so great ' developers that we end up with tomorrow will hopefully be great developers in a couple of years.IMO , the app store is too much like Steam .
It 's too easy and convenient , all around , to fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA title is a bit over reaching.
To make matters worse, the guy handed the app over to someone else to continue development in the App store.The second link lists 3 that are leaving.
This doesn't strike me as the same as rats leaving a sinking ship.There are thousands of developers lined up behind them.Yes the approval process sucks, and yes it needs improvement.
To be fair, they are making it more transparent [ubergizmo.com].
They are also still swamped with submissions meaning there are still way to many developers submitting apps.
The 'not so great' developers that we end up with tomorrow will hopefully be great developers in a couple of years.IMO, the app store is too much like Steam.
It's too easy and convenient, all around, to fail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165916</id>
	<title>Re:Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>Baki</author>
	<datestamp>1258634340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same here: I've got an iphone and bought a macbook pro after that, but my next phone will be an android. I also doubt if I'll buy a mac again in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here : I 've got an iphone and bought a macbook pro after that , but my next phone will be an android .
I also doubt if I 'll buy a mac again in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here: I've got an iphone and bought a macbook pro after that, but my next phone will be an android.
I also doubt if I'll buy a mac again in the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160118</id>
	<title>Security</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258657800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hear lots of complaints from developers and wanna-be developers, but I don't hear anyone complaining about security breaches, viruses, spyware, and malware in general on the iPhone - basically an OS X computer. Obviously the first reason is because it is OS X not Windows (any flavor). But the second reason is that Apple is watching for it. While I am not a fan of the opaque approval process (it is getting better), I greatly enjoy knowing that there is less likelihood of my mobile being taken down by some crafty coding. I depend on the device. I try different software to see if it will help me in my life and work. That means trying things from people I don't know. That means taking a risk with my device up-time and my data. So I'm glad that Apple is running as the front-end security. Maybe you are not. Maybe you (whoever is reading this) posting here complaining that Apple won't let you do whatever you want are one of the developers trying to create crafty code to get my data. I hope you keep complaining and Apple keeps guarding the gate(s).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear lots of complaints from developers and wan na-be developers , but I do n't hear anyone complaining about security breaches , viruses , spyware , and malware in general on the iPhone - basically an OS X computer .
Obviously the first reason is because it is OS X not Windows ( any flavor ) .
But the second reason is that Apple is watching for it .
While I am not a fan of the opaque approval process ( it is getting better ) , I greatly enjoy knowing that there is less likelihood of my mobile being taken down by some crafty coding .
I depend on the device .
I try different software to see if it will help me in my life and work .
That means trying things from people I do n't know .
That means taking a risk with my device up-time and my data .
So I 'm glad that Apple is running as the front-end security .
Maybe you are not .
Maybe you ( whoever is reading this ) posting here complaining that Apple wo n't let you do whatever you want are one of the developers trying to create crafty code to get my data .
I hope you keep complaining and Apple keeps guarding the gate ( s ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear lots of complaints from developers and wanna-be developers, but I don't hear anyone complaining about security breaches, viruses, spyware, and malware in general on the iPhone - basically an OS X computer.
Obviously the first reason is because it is OS X not Windows (any flavor).
But the second reason is that Apple is watching for it.
While I am not a fan of the opaque approval process (it is getting better), I greatly enjoy knowing that there is less likelihood of my mobile being taken down by some crafty coding.
I depend on the device.
I try different software to see if it will help me in my life and work.
That means trying things from people I don't know.
That means taking a risk with my device up-time and my data.
So I'm glad that Apple is running as the front-end security.
Maybe you are not.
Maybe you (whoever is reading this) posting here complaining that Apple won't let you do whatever you want are one of the developers trying to create crafty code to get my data.
I hope you keep complaining and Apple keeps guarding the gate(s).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159280</id>
	<title>That's not the biggest problem...</title>
	<author>Qwavel</author>
	<datestamp>1258655280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem isn't so much the app store approval process, it is that there is no other way to get your app onto (non jail broken) iPhones.</p><p>Soon everyone will have an app store, and maybe they too will refuse to carry applications that compete with them, but at least those other platforms allow the consumer the choice to get those applications somewhere else.</p><p>The smartphone is the next personal computer, so let's imagine for a moment that Microsoft had done for Windows what Apple is now doing with the iPhone: they get to approve every app, take a 30\% cut of all profits, and deny anything that might compete with them (e.g. any browser other then IE).  Windows would have no viruses, but at what cost?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is n't so much the app store approval process , it is that there is no other way to get your app onto ( non jail broken ) iPhones.Soon everyone will have an app store , and maybe they too will refuse to carry applications that compete with them , but at least those other platforms allow the consumer the choice to get those applications somewhere else.The smartphone is the next personal computer , so let 's imagine for a moment that Microsoft had done for Windows what Apple is now doing with the iPhone : they get to approve every app , take a 30 \ % cut of all profits , and deny anything that might compete with them ( e.g .
any browser other then IE ) .
Windows would have no viruses , but at what cost ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem isn't so much the app store approval process, it is that there is no other way to get your app onto (non jail broken) iPhones.Soon everyone will have an app store, and maybe they too will refuse to carry applications that compete with them, but at least those other platforms allow the consumer the choice to get those applications somewhere else.The smartphone is the next personal computer, so let's imagine for a moment that Microsoft had done for Windows what Apple is now doing with the iPhone: they get to approve every app, take a 30\% cut of all profits, and deny anything that might compete with them (e.g.
any browser other then IE).
Windows would have no viruses, but at what cost?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164846</id>
	<title>Re:Dear fleeing developers.</title>
	<author>JohnFen</author>
	<datestamp>1258629780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn. So there isn't a single awesome smartphone coming for the US market? And since handheld computers are merging with smartphones (and thus on their way out), that means there isn't a single awesome handheld computer in the US?</p><p>I guess I'll have to go with Android. It has a boatload of issues too, but it's the lesser of two evils.</p><p>I remember when the US was where the action was in technology. *sigh*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn .
So there is n't a single awesome smartphone coming for the US market ?
And since handheld computers are merging with smartphones ( and thus on their way out ) , that means there is n't a single awesome handheld computer in the US ? I guess I 'll have to go with Android .
It has a boatload of issues too , but it 's the lesser of two evils.I remember when the US was where the action was in technology .
* sigh *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn.
So there isn't a single awesome smartphone coming for the US market?
And since handheld computers are merging with smartphones (and thus on their way out), that means there isn't a single awesome handheld computer in the US?I guess I'll have to go with Android.
It has a boatload of issues too, but it's the lesser of two evils.I remember when the US was where the action was in technology.
*sigh*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159810</id>
	<title>Rogue Amoeba was told why their app was rejected</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1258656960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>forgot who it was, but someone blogged that RA was told by Apple that their app was rejected because the iphone API doesn't allow Apple copyrighted content to be used. the Mac API does. instead of fixing it, RA sat on it for months, whined on the blogs and then decided to stop developing for the iphone.</p><p>tweetdeck was also rejected at first because they sent an app that crashed all the time.</p><p>most of the other sob stories i read about Apple rejecting apps also had a real story where they were told why it was rejected but didn't want to fix it. the C64 emulator games app is a perfect example</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>forgot who it was , but someone blogged that RA was told by Apple that their app was rejected because the iphone API does n't allow Apple copyrighted content to be used .
the Mac API does .
instead of fixing it , RA sat on it for months , whined on the blogs and then decided to stop developing for the iphone.tweetdeck was also rejected at first because they sent an app that crashed all the time.most of the other sob stories i read about Apple rejecting apps also had a real story where they were told why it was rejected but did n't want to fix it .
the C64 emulator games app is a perfect example</tokentext>
<sentencetext>forgot who it was, but someone blogged that RA was told by Apple that their app was rejected because the iphone API doesn't allow Apple copyrighted content to be used.
the Mac API does.
instead of fixing it, RA sat on it for months, whined on the blogs and then decided to stop developing for the iphone.tweetdeck was also rejected at first because they sent an app that crashed all the time.most of the other sob stories i read about Apple rejecting apps also had a real story where they were told why it was rejected but didn't want to fix it.
the C64 emulator games app is a perfect example</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159912</id>
	<title>Re:Cry wolf</title>
	<author>GuardBoy98</author>
	<datestamp>1258657200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>one
two
five
(three, sir)
three!</htmltext>
<tokenext>one two five ( three , sir ) three !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>one
two
five
(three, sir)
three!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159566</id>
	<title>Re:Cry wolf</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>ALL should really be both, and "these" should really clarify that "these" is only two.</p></div><p>Not arguing against your overall point, but you don't do counting too well, do you? Here, count along with me...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Facebook's Joe Hewitt (<b>one</b>), Second Gear's Justin Williams (<b>two</b>), and long-time Mac software developer Rogue Amoeba (<b>three</b>) have all recently decided that enough is enough...</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>ALL should really be both , and " these " should really clarify that " these " is only two.Not arguing against your overall point , but you do n't do counting too well , do you ?
Here , count along with me...Facebook 's Joe Hewitt ( one ) , Second Gear 's Justin Williams ( two ) , and long-time Mac software developer Rogue Amoeba ( three ) have all recently decided that enough is enough.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ALL should really be both, and "these" should really clarify that "these" is only two.Not arguing against your overall point, but you don't do counting too well, do you?
Here, count along with me...Facebook's Joe Hewitt (one), Second Gear's Justin Williams (two), and long-time Mac software developer Rogue Amoeba (three) have all recently decided that enough is enough...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159088</id>
	<title>oxymoron</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"respected developers" indeed</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" respected developers " indeed</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"respected developers" indeed</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159834</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258657020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a hobbiest iPhone developer. The way I see it, the problem is not with Apple enforcing its unknown API restriction. The problem is with Apple *selectively* enforcing that particular restriction and many others.<br>For example, the RedLaser app which is one of the top selling apps in the app store uses an undocumented API, specifically, UIGetScreenImage().<br>Google's search app uses undocumented APIs for proximity detection (to dim the screen and start listening when you put the phone up against your face).<br>Many of the original camera tweaking apps also skirted the API.<br>Yet many other developers had their apps roundly rejected for using the very same methods and APIs.</p><p>The problem with Apple's approval process has never been about the restrictions, the problem has always been with Apple's unpredictable, arbitrary and selective application of those restrictions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a hobbiest iPhone developer .
The way I see it , the problem is not with Apple enforcing its unknown API restriction .
The problem is with Apple * selectively * enforcing that particular restriction and many others.For example , the RedLaser app which is one of the top selling apps in the app store uses an undocumented API , specifically , UIGetScreenImage ( ) .Google 's search app uses undocumented APIs for proximity detection ( to dim the screen and start listening when you put the phone up against your face ) .Many of the original camera tweaking apps also skirted the API.Yet many other developers had their apps roundly rejected for using the very same methods and APIs.The problem with Apple 's approval process has never been about the restrictions , the problem has always been with Apple 's unpredictable , arbitrary and selective application of those restrictions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a hobbiest iPhone developer.
The way I see it, the problem is not with Apple enforcing its unknown API restriction.
The problem is with Apple *selectively* enforcing that particular restriction and many others.For example, the RedLaser app which is one of the top selling apps in the app store uses an undocumented API, specifically, UIGetScreenImage().Google's search app uses undocumented APIs for proximity detection (to dim the screen and start listening when you put the phone up against your face).Many of the original camera tweaking apps also skirted the API.Yet many other developers had their apps roundly rejected for using the very same methods and APIs.The problem with Apple's approval process has never been about the restrictions, the problem has always been with Apple's unpredictable, arbitrary and selective application of those restrictions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159668</id>
	<title>Where are the people going to move to?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My question is, where are the developers going to move to?  I'm hoping that Windows Mobile and Android can woo them to their platforms, so new apps appear there.  As it is now, if a local news station has an app, it will be for the iPhone only.  I'm hoping that changes to at least the iPhone and the Android platform.</p><p>At least the iPhone boom and bust was over fairly quickly, as bubbles go.  Long term, Apple will be hurt overall because they wanted so much control over the distribution chain (have to use OS X for app writing, use me.com for the account, pay $99 at the minimum for a dev ID, then have to submit your app to their store and at their whim, they might approve it.)  This was a dumb move on Apple's part.  Both Android and Windows Mobile allow for application developers to distribute to users their works without having to go through a central choke point.</p><p>In 2006, the industry was caught with their pants down because they thought American phone customers only wanted the next RAZR or a minimum functioning phone.  However, unlike the MP3 player market which expanded and took people in who never had such a device, cellphones are a zero sum market.  One iPhone sold means one less Nokia phone.  So, even though Apple won the first round, now they have actual competition from companies such as Motorola and HTC.  Cell phone providers who don't like being in AT&amp;T's shadow (in the US that is) are furiously working to stay relevant.  Sprint/Nextel is trying to cater for businesses.  Verizon has a solid CDMA network.  T-Mobile has very good customer service and top notch global coverage.</p><p>So, combine the fact that there are a lot of entrenched cellular network providers, many cellphone makers, and four solid operating systems (Symbien, Android, WM, and BlackberryOS) that can easily go head to head with Apple, and there is plenty of room for the devs who have gotten the middle finger by Apple.</p><p>Yes, Apple has momentum because they have had around two and a half years of unrestricted market grabbing, but with the latest gen phones like the Droid, Apple actually has competition.</p><p>One lesson I hope that HTC, Motorola, and the other Android makers learn from having Apple's boot to their crotch for two years is that they need to innovate and not just play catch up.  Their phones need cool and useful features and they need to invent those themselves and not chase Apple's latest thing.  For example, if Sprint decided to get an Android unit made that included wireless routing like the MiFi, they would have a hot seller on their hands because virtually every laptop user wants tethering.  Or, if T-Mobile got together with Napster and offered a music subscription offering unlimited music for $15 a month, people would jump at that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My question is , where are the developers going to move to ?
I 'm hoping that Windows Mobile and Android can woo them to their platforms , so new apps appear there .
As it is now , if a local news station has an app , it will be for the iPhone only .
I 'm hoping that changes to at least the iPhone and the Android platform.At least the iPhone boom and bust was over fairly quickly , as bubbles go .
Long term , Apple will be hurt overall because they wanted so much control over the distribution chain ( have to use OS X for app writing , use me.com for the account , pay $ 99 at the minimum for a dev ID , then have to submit your app to their store and at their whim , they might approve it .
) This was a dumb move on Apple 's part .
Both Android and Windows Mobile allow for application developers to distribute to users their works without having to go through a central choke point.In 2006 , the industry was caught with their pants down because they thought American phone customers only wanted the next RAZR or a minimum functioning phone .
However , unlike the MP3 player market which expanded and took people in who never had such a device , cellphones are a zero sum market .
One iPhone sold means one less Nokia phone .
So , even though Apple won the first round , now they have actual competition from companies such as Motorola and HTC .
Cell phone providers who do n't like being in AT&amp;T 's shadow ( in the US that is ) are furiously working to stay relevant .
Sprint/Nextel is trying to cater for businesses .
Verizon has a solid CDMA network .
T-Mobile has very good customer service and top notch global coverage.So , combine the fact that there are a lot of entrenched cellular network providers , many cellphone makers , and four solid operating systems ( Symbien , Android , WM , and BlackberryOS ) that can easily go head to head with Apple , and there is plenty of room for the devs who have gotten the middle finger by Apple.Yes , Apple has momentum because they have had around two and a half years of unrestricted market grabbing , but with the latest gen phones like the Droid , Apple actually has competition.One lesson I hope that HTC , Motorola , and the other Android makers learn from having Apple 's boot to their crotch for two years is that they need to innovate and not just play catch up .
Their phones need cool and useful features and they need to invent those themselves and not chase Apple 's latest thing .
For example , if Sprint decided to get an Android unit made that included wireless routing like the MiFi , they would have a hot seller on their hands because virtually every laptop user wants tethering .
Or , if T-Mobile got together with Napster and offered a music subscription offering unlimited music for $ 15 a month , people would jump at that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My question is, where are the developers going to move to?
I'm hoping that Windows Mobile and Android can woo them to their platforms, so new apps appear there.
As it is now, if a local news station has an app, it will be for the iPhone only.
I'm hoping that changes to at least the iPhone and the Android platform.At least the iPhone boom and bust was over fairly quickly, as bubbles go.
Long term, Apple will be hurt overall because they wanted so much control over the distribution chain (have to use OS X for app writing, use me.com for the account, pay $99 at the minimum for a dev ID, then have to submit your app to their store and at their whim, they might approve it.
)  This was a dumb move on Apple's part.
Both Android and Windows Mobile allow for application developers to distribute to users their works without having to go through a central choke point.In 2006, the industry was caught with their pants down because they thought American phone customers only wanted the next RAZR or a minimum functioning phone.
However, unlike the MP3 player market which expanded and took people in who never had such a device, cellphones are a zero sum market.
One iPhone sold means one less Nokia phone.
So, even though Apple won the first round, now they have actual competition from companies such as Motorola and HTC.
Cell phone providers who don't like being in AT&amp;T's shadow (in the US that is) are furiously working to stay relevant.
Sprint/Nextel is trying to cater for businesses.
Verizon has a solid CDMA network.
T-Mobile has very good customer service and top notch global coverage.So, combine the fact that there are a lot of entrenched cellular network providers, many cellphone makers, and four solid operating systems (Symbien, Android, WM, and BlackberryOS) that can easily go head to head with Apple, and there is plenty of room for the devs who have gotten the middle finger by Apple.Yes, Apple has momentum because they have had around two and a half years of unrestricted market grabbing, but with the latest gen phones like the Droid, Apple actually has competition.One lesson I hope that HTC, Motorola, and the other Android makers learn from having Apple's boot to their crotch for two years is that they need to innovate and not just play catch up.
Their phones need cool and useful features and they need to invent those themselves and not chase Apple's latest thing.
For example, if Sprint decided to get an Android unit made that included wireless routing like the MiFi, they would have a hot seller on their hands because virtually every laptop user wants tethering.
Or, if T-Mobile got together with Napster and offered a music subscription offering unlimited music for $15 a month, people would jump at that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159576</id>
	<title>Re:Cry wolf</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Facebook's Joe Hewitt </p><p>Second Gear's Justin Williams</p><p>and long-time Mac software developer Rogue Amoeba</p> </div><p>Three.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook 's Joe Hewitt Second Gear 's Justin Williamsand long-time Mac software developer Rogue Amoeba Three .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Facebook's Joe Hewitt Second Gear's Justin Williamsand long-time Mac software developer Rogue Amoeba Three.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162156</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258621260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You missed one huge point:  More is not always better.  Mac has been based on SIMPLICITY and allowing 100 apps that do the same thing only hurts the average apple user who doesn't want choice as long as the app does what they want it to.  I guess I shouldn't expect anything different from a bunch of FOSS fanboys who think its fun to make 100 distributions of Linux with 100 different programs that all do the same thing installed on each distribution.</p><p>Complain all you want but Apple's decision probably works better for the AVERAGE mac user (not techies) and pisses off techies and developers.  This decision will likely not lower quality because developers (who are trying to make real money) will realize they can't throw some crap together and expect it to get approved, it actually has to work well and not duplicate functionality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You missed one huge point : More is not always better .
Mac has been based on SIMPLICITY and allowing 100 apps that do the same thing only hurts the average apple user who does n't want choice as long as the app does what they want it to .
I guess I should n't expect anything different from a bunch of FOSS fanboys who think its fun to make 100 distributions of Linux with 100 different programs that all do the same thing installed on each distribution.Complain all you want but Apple 's decision probably works better for the AVERAGE mac user ( not techies ) and pisses off techies and developers .
This decision will likely not lower quality because developers ( who are trying to make real money ) will realize they ca n't throw some crap together and expect it to get approved , it actually has to work well and not duplicate functionality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You missed one huge point:  More is not always better.
Mac has been based on SIMPLICITY and allowing 100 apps that do the same thing only hurts the average apple user who doesn't want choice as long as the app does what they want it to.
I guess I shouldn't expect anything different from a bunch of FOSS fanboys who think its fun to make 100 distributions of Linux with 100 different programs that all do the same thing installed on each distribution.Complain all you want but Apple's decision probably works better for the AVERAGE mac user (not techies) and pisses off techies and developers.
This decision will likely not lower quality because developers (who are trying to make real money) will realize they can't throw some crap together and expect it to get approved, it actually has to work well and not duplicate functionality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159188</id>
	<title>Not lower quality apps.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; Though there are tens of thousands of other developers who have pumped out over 100,000 apps for the platform, continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software."</p><p>The developer who flits from language to language trying to get rich off the latest trend isn't going to be the guy I want to buy apps from anyway. I'd rather buy something from a hardcore guy who won't give up on a platform no matter what the world says. That guy is going to be making the best app for the platform. Not the guy who learned enough objective-c to make compiler errors stop.</p><p>An alternate statement could be made that it will result in fewer high quality apps making it easier for the cream to rise to the top. The same exact thing that I actually enjoy about OSX. OmniGraffle is kind of the only game in town but it definitely gets the job done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; Though there are tens of thousands of other developers who have pumped out over 100,000 apps for the platform , continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software .
" The developer who flits from language to language trying to get rich off the latest trend is n't going to be the guy I want to buy apps from anyway .
I 'd rather buy something from a hardcore guy who wo n't give up on a platform no matter what the world says .
That guy is going to be making the best app for the platform .
Not the guy who learned enough objective-c to make compiler errors stop.An alternate statement could be made that it will result in fewer high quality apps making it easier for the cream to rise to the top .
The same exact thing that I actually enjoy about OSX .
OmniGraffle is kind of the only game in town but it definitely gets the job done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; Though there are tens of thousands of other developers who have pumped out over 100,000 apps for the platform, continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software.
"The developer who flits from language to language trying to get rich off the latest trend isn't going to be the guy I want to buy apps from anyway.
I'd rather buy something from a hardcore guy who won't give up on a platform no matter what the world says.
That guy is going to be making the best app for the platform.
Not the guy who learned enough objective-c to make compiler errors stop.An alternate statement could be made that it will result in fewer high quality apps making it easier for the cream to rise to the top.
The same exact thing that I actually enjoy about OSX.
OmniGraffle is kind of the only game in town but it definitely gets the job done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159858</id>
	<title>Re:2010 Year of the linux</title>
	<author>tsa</author>
	<datestamp>1258657080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes! I hope they all flock to Maemo to develop for the awesome Nokia N900 and its children and competitors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes !
I hope they all flock to Maemo to develop for the awesome Nokia N900 and its children and competitors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes!
I hope they all flock to Maemo to develop for the awesome Nokia N900 and its children and competitors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268</id>
	<title>100k apps?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258655280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Though there are tens of thousands of other developers who have pumped out over 100,000 apps for the platform..</p></div><p>100,000 apps?  Are these truly unique apps or are most trivial differences (app#1 main icon is blue, app#2 main icon is red...)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Though there are tens of thousands of other developers who have pumped out over 100,000 apps for the platform..100,000 apps ?
Are these truly unique apps or are most trivial differences ( app # 1 main icon is blue , app # 2 main icon is red... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though there are tens of thousands of other developers who have pumped out over 100,000 apps for the platform..100,000 apps?
Are these truly unique apps or are most trivial differences (app#1 main icon is blue, app#2 main icon is red...)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159016</id>
	<title>Sudden outbreak of common sense?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Subject says it all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Subject says it all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Subject says it all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159198</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Irony where, exactly? I was recently involved in Facebook app development, and the whole system is very open, no approval required.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Irony where , exactly ?
I was recently involved in Facebook app development , and the whole system is very open , no approval required .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Irony where, exactly?
I was recently involved in Facebook app development, and the whole system is very open, no approval required.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159480</id>
	<title>Y@ou insEnsitive clod.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258655940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">Towel u8der the Available to it will be among</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Towel u8der the Available to it will be among [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Towel u8der the Available to it will be among [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160810</id>
	<title>Re:Implications For Future iPhone Fart Apps?</title>
	<author>larry bagina</author>
	<datestamp>1258660020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
As a developer working on a queef app, I hope so!
</p><p>
PS -- ladies, get your pussies ready!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a developer working on a queef app , I hope so !
PS -- ladies , get your pussies ready !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
As a developer working on a queef app, I hope so!
PS -- ladies, get your pussies ready!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162536</id>
	<title>Obsession</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258622580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What, the iPhone is not the second coming of christ? What the hell are we going to do now? Maybe 2012 is really coming since the iPhone doesn't have an app to keep the bloody Earth spinning properly.</p><p>Who has time to know of/check-out/use/have-fun-with the million apps out there? Right, I know a few guys like that, with iPhone or purple berries or paranoid phones (oh, it's andropovid or something?) and try to avoid them outright; in order to be aware of all the apps, that's all they do - maybe the apps sleep for them, too.</p><p>A device is inferior if it performs simple but common tasks poorly out of the box. The iPhone is an inferior device since it cannot be used as a pager out of the box ("but you can do this and that, you ponzy looser that doesn't know squat about thechnology; just unlock it and see the light"). Ok, I give up, you feel superior with all the tricks one can implement, and I should not expect a $200 device to have a long enough text message sound file to wake me up when I'm on night shift. Or should I? Quite a few guys still have 800 MHz pagers at work and it's for a damn good simple reason: to be within reach if on-call in a noisy place,  fishing, on top of a mountain, and all the other places on can be while performing her duties - all places within 3G coverage, yes there are mountains close by.</p><p>One more thing: all these bio scan based devices seem to be designed only for indoor or warm climate folks since I can't answer the crappy thing with my gloves on. So if I'm helping some poor folk in freezing weather and need to call out, I better have good peripheral circulation; otherwise, we're both doomed. Or we can make a fire with and eat some apps while waiting for the white light. Right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What , the iPhone is not the second coming of christ ?
What the hell are we going to do now ?
Maybe 2012 is really coming since the iPhone does n't have an app to keep the bloody Earth spinning properly.Who has time to know of/check-out/use/have-fun-with the million apps out there ?
Right , I know a few guys like that , with iPhone or purple berries or paranoid phones ( oh , it 's andropovid or something ?
) and try to avoid them outright ; in order to be aware of all the apps , that 's all they do - maybe the apps sleep for them , too.A device is inferior if it performs simple but common tasks poorly out of the box .
The iPhone is an inferior device since it can not be used as a pager out of the box ( " but you can do this and that , you ponzy looser that does n't know squat about thechnology ; just unlock it and see the light " ) .
Ok , I give up , you feel superior with all the tricks one can implement , and I should not expect a $ 200 device to have a long enough text message sound file to wake me up when I 'm on night shift .
Or should I ?
Quite a few guys still have 800 MHz pagers at work and it 's for a damn good simple reason : to be within reach if on-call in a noisy place , fishing , on top of a mountain , and all the other places on can be while performing her duties - all places within 3G coverage , yes there are mountains close by.One more thing : all these bio scan based devices seem to be designed only for indoor or warm climate folks since I ca n't answer the crappy thing with my gloves on .
So if I 'm helping some poor folk in freezing weather and need to call out , I better have good peripheral circulation ; otherwise , we 're both doomed .
Or we can make a fire with and eat some apps while waiting for the white light .
Right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, the iPhone is not the second coming of christ?
What the hell are we going to do now?
Maybe 2012 is really coming since the iPhone doesn't have an app to keep the bloody Earth spinning properly.Who has time to know of/check-out/use/have-fun-with the million apps out there?
Right, I know a few guys like that, with iPhone or purple berries or paranoid phones (oh, it's andropovid or something?
) and try to avoid them outright; in order to be aware of all the apps, that's all they do - maybe the apps sleep for them, too.A device is inferior if it performs simple but common tasks poorly out of the box.
The iPhone is an inferior device since it cannot be used as a pager out of the box ("but you can do this and that, you ponzy looser that doesn't know squat about thechnology; just unlock it and see the light").
Ok, I give up, you feel superior with all the tricks one can implement, and I should not expect a $200 device to have a long enough text message sound file to wake me up when I'm on night shift.
Or should I?
Quite a few guys still have 800 MHz pagers at work and it's for a damn good simple reason: to be within reach if on-call in a noisy place,  fishing, on top of a mountain, and all the other places on can be while performing her duties - all places within 3G coverage, yes there are mountains close by.One more thing: all these bio scan based devices seem to be designed only for indoor or warm climate folks since I can't answer the crappy thing with my gloves on.
So if I'm helping some poor folk in freezing weather and need to call out, I better have good peripheral circulation; otherwise, we're both doomed.
Or we can make a fire with and eat some apps while waiting for the white light.
Right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162660</id>
	<title>Re:Dear fleeing developers.</title>
	<author>urulokion</author>
	<datestamp>1258622880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No one will tell you what you cannot do?</p><p>Um, this is obvious bullshit.</p><p>If you design something that interferes with the wrong person's profits, or might mess with the stability of the device, then that app will be disallowed just as surely on the N900 as it would be on any other cellphone, including the iPhone.</p></div><p>Uh, no they can't. The base software on the N900 does come an xterminal program. The N900 is "locked down" (I use that term very loosely) to prevent a casual user from inadvertently screwing up their phone.  But for the knowledgeable user, you can gain a root shell on the N900 quite easily. If you have root, well, you own the device.</p><p>Maemo is built on top of Debian. You can do  'agt-get install x' from a root shell to install software from any repository yourself. If you screw up your phone well it's you own fault. But one that can easily be corrected. Just reflash it with a base image. Restore all your contacts and restore from a previous Backup, reinstall your apps (the restore will do that for you if you want) and you're good to go.  Want OGG support? Install it. Want tethering? (yes it's not setup by default) Just tweak some configuration files. Want OpenSSH? Install it. (That's Openssh Client AND Server mind you).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No one will tell you what you can not do ? Um , this is obvious bullshit.If you design something that interferes with the wrong person 's profits , or might mess with the stability of the device , then that app will be disallowed just as surely on the N900 as it would be on any other cellphone , including the iPhone.Uh , no they ca n't .
The base software on the N900 does come an xterminal program .
The N900 is " locked down " ( I use that term very loosely ) to prevent a casual user from inadvertently screwing up their phone .
But for the knowledgeable user , you can gain a root shell on the N900 quite easily .
If you have root , well , you own the device.Maemo is built on top of Debian .
You can do 'agt-get install x ' from a root shell to install software from any repository yourself .
If you screw up your phone well it 's you own fault .
But one that can easily be corrected .
Just reflash it with a base image .
Restore all your contacts and restore from a previous Backup , reinstall your apps ( the restore will do that for you if you want ) and you 're good to go .
Want OGG support ?
Install it .
Want tethering ?
( yes it 's not setup by default ) Just tweak some configuration files .
Want OpenSSH ?
Install it .
( That 's Openssh Client AND Server mind you ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one will tell you what you cannot do?Um, this is obvious bullshit.If you design something that interferes with the wrong person's profits, or might mess with the stability of the device, then that app will be disallowed just as surely on the N900 as it would be on any other cellphone, including the iPhone.Uh, no they can't.
The base software on the N900 does come an xterminal program.
The N900 is "locked down" (I use that term very loosely) to prevent a casual user from inadvertently screwing up their phone.
But for the knowledgeable user, you can gain a root shell on the N900 quite easily.
If you have root, well, you own the device.Maemo is built on top of Debian.
You can do  'agt-get install x' from a root shell to install software from any repository yourself.
If you screw up your phone well it's you own fault.
But one that can easily be corrected.
Just reflash it with a base image.
Restore all your contacts and restore from a previous Backup, reinstall your apps (the restore will do that for you if you want) and you're good to go.
Want OGG support?
Install it.
Want tethering?
(yes it's not setup by default) Just tweak some configuration files.
Want OpenSSH?
Install it.
(That's Openssh Client AND Server mind you).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159022</id>
	<title>part of the story</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>They may cite disapproval with Apple's approval process but the reality the app store is getting diluted with more and more apps and developers, and it's getting tougher to make those million dollar apps. Like anything, the first on board have the best chance of benefiting the most fiscally and in popularity. I assume some of these developers are also getting disillusioned that the glory days are gone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They may cite disapproval with Apple 's approval process but the reality the app store is getting diluted with more and more apps and developers , and it 's getting tougher to make those million dollar apps .
Like anything , the first on board have the best chance of benefiting the most fiscally and in popularity .
I assume some of these developers are also getting disillusioned that the glory days are gone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They may cite disapproval with Apple's approval process but the reality the app store is getting diluted with more and more apps and developers, and it's getting tougher to make those million dollar apps.
Like anything, the first on board have the best chance of benefiting the most fiscally and in popularity.
I assume some of these developers are also getting disillusioned that the glory days are gone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162706</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>RyuuzakiTetsuya</author>
	<datestamp>1258623060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clearly you're not aware of the state of modern software.</p><p>No matter what the platform, no matter what the OS.  About 95\% of software is garbage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clearly you 're not aware of the state of modern software.No matter what the platform , no matter what the OS .
About 95 \ % of software is garbage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clearly you're not aware of the state of modern software.No matter what the platform, no matter what the OS.
About 95\% of software is garbage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161994</id>
	<title>Re:Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258663860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which is why we need many different phones.  Just like the any computing device, the critical metric is what one wants to do with it.  If I spent all my time using Solid Works, that kind of determines the machine I need.   If I am creating varied content, and the work flow is important, then another type of machine will be necessary.  It would be silly to buy an iPhone if one spent the day dictating emails, even if there were an app, as the iPhone would be overkill.
<p>
The nice thing about a market economy is that no one product has to do everything.  We do not have an imposed government mandated efficiency expert saying these ar ethe things we need, and we will have one product that does these things, and any more is wasteful.  No, we have a variety of products that take a number of different approaches to solving the problem.
</p><p>
OTOH, most of us don't make decisions solely based on emotional connection with the product.  If there are several competing products that basically do the same thing, then, sure, we will choose the one that makes us feel nice, but in most cases we don't.  Few in the US loved Japanese cars in the late 70's and early 80's, but that didn't mean we continued to buy the pretty American cars.
</p><p>
In any case the issue of developers, respected or not, leaving the market is not relevant.  As a market grows, those that cannot work within the structure of the market leave. This is only natural.  Inefficient and ineffectual firms go out of business.  One can complain about regulation, but in this case complaining would be anti-market.  The iPhone is Apples toy, and the only thing that will change it is if the government takes it away.  This would be silly, because, as the poster says there are other options.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is why we need many different phones .
Just like the any computing device , the critical metric is what one wants to do with it .
If I spent all my time using Solid Works , that kind of determines the machine I need .
If I am creating varied content , and the work flow is important , then another type of machine will be necessary .
It would be silly to buy an iPhone if one spent the day dictating emails , even if there were an app , as the iPhone would be overkill .
The nice thing about a market economy is that no one product has to do everything .
We do not have an imposed government mandated efficiency expert saying these ar ethe things we need , and we will have one product that does these things , and any more is wasteful .
No , we have a variety of products that take a number of different approaches to solving the problem .
OTOH , most of us do n't make decisions solely based on emotional connection with the product .
If there are several competing products that basically do the same thing , then , sure , we will choose the one that makes us feel nice , but in most cases we do n't .
Few in the US loved Japanese cars in the late 70 's and early 80 's , but that did n't mean we continued to buy the pretty American cars .
In any case the issue of developers , respected or not , leaving the market is not relevant .
As a market grows , those that can not work within the structure of the market leave .
This is only natural .
Inefficient and ineffectual firms go out of business .
One can complain about regulation , but in this case complaining would be anti-market .
The iPhone is Apples toy , and the only thing that will change it is if the government takes it away .
This would be silly , because , as the poster says there are other options .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is why we need many different phones.
Just like the any computing device, the critical metric is what one wants to do with it.
If I spent all my time using Solid Works, that kind of determines the machine I need.
If I am creating varied content, and the work flow is important, then another type of machine will be necessary.
It would be silly to buy an iPhone if one spent the day dictating emails, even if there were an app, as the iPhone would be overkill.
The nice thing about a market economy is that no one product has to do everything.
We do not have an imposed government mandated efficiency expert saying these ar ethe things we need, and we will have one product that does these things, and any more is wasteful.
No, we have a variety of products that take a number of different approaches to solving the problem.
OTOH, most of us don't make decisions solely based on emotional connection with the product.
If there are several competing products that basically do the same thing, then, sure, we will choose the one that makes us feel nice, but in most cases we don't.
Few in the US loved Japanese cars in the late 70's and early 80's, but that didn't mean we continued to buy the pretty American cars.
In any case the issue of developers, respected or not, leaving the market is not relevant.
As a market grows, those that cannot work within the structure of the market leave.
This is only natural.
Inefficient and ineffectual firms go out of business.
One can complain about regulation, but in this case complaining would be anti-market.
The iPhone is Apples toy, and the only thing that will change it is if the government takes it away.
This would be silly, because, as the poster says there are other options.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159524</id>
	<title>Re:Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah Steve Jobs' vision is so limited he lives in near middle class poverty...Oh wait no he doesn't, how about you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah Steve Jobs ' vision is so limited he lives in near middle class poverty...Oh wait no he does n't , how about you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah Steve Jobs' vision is so limited he lives in near middle class poverty...Oh wait no he doesn't, how about you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163480</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>rinoid</author>
	<datestamp>1258625400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't really consider the Facebook app all that innovative but it does a great job presenting a web site in a touch phone.</p><p>Folks, Facebook has not left the platform. We don't even know why the developer is off the iPhone project (maybe he bitched too much?) -- We DO KNOW the employee at Facebook who happened to develop the Facebook iPhone application wrote a lengthy piece on his displeasure with the App Store.
</p><p>This does not equal fewer applications.</p><p>And this is not droves of developers. Raise your hand if you had heard of Rogue Amoeba before this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't really consider the Facebook app all that innovative but it does a great job presenting a web site in a touch phone.Folks , Facebook has not left the platform .
We do n't even know why the developer is off the iPhone project ( maybe he bitched too much ?
) -- We DO KNOW the employee at Facebook who happened to develop the Facebook iPhone application wrote a lengthy piece on his displeasure with the App Store .
This does not equal fewer applications.And this is not droves of developers .
Raise your hand if you had heard of Rogue Amoeba before this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't really consider the Facebook app all that innovative but it does a great job presenting a web site in a touch phone.Folks, Facebook has not left the platform.
We don't even know why the developer is off the iPhone project (maybe he bitched too much?
) -- We DO KNOW the employee at Facebook who happened to develop the Facebook iPhone application wrote a lengthy piece on his displeasure with the App Store.
This does not equal fewer applications.And this is not droves of developers.
Raise your hand if you had heard of Rogue Amoeba before this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159672</id>
	<title>Re:2010 Year of the linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>cellphone</p></div><p>2012 the year Linux accepts it's place in the computer world. Not a troll just a realist. I was an early fan and saw the potential of Linux. For at least ten of those years I have constantly heard that Linux is going to became users friendly and easy to use, install and maintain. I've finally become a realist and accepted Linux has found it's place and it isn't going to change. It's an exceptional server and works great as a workstation in companies large enough to have dedicated support people. It's great for tinkerers and has a lot of power and flexibility for the hobbyist and power users. For the average user it simply isn't going to happen. Unless an Apple sized company embraces it and puts the resources into bringing it mainstream there are simply too many problems for regular people to deal with. Like I say I was an early fan but people waiting for it to take over are kidding themselves. I'm a big fan of the open source model but it also shows it's limitations the fact that there simply aren't enough people contributing to write the drivers needed to support all the hardware out there and software developers are caught in the catch-22 of developing for a platform few people use but could be bigger if there was more software. There will always be support much as Unix never went away and it still has the potential to go mainstream I just wouldn't hold my breath. Ironically as much venom as there tends to be towards Mac it's probably the closest you are likely to see in the mainstream to Linux. I still consider it a risky but critical move when Apple developed OSX. It cost them some customer support early on but there is no way Mac would be as big as it is now without OSX. Linux absolutely could do a Mac like growth but until some one with deep pockets takes it on it's pretty much found it's market share. At least in the US and most of the developed world.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>cellphone2012 the year Linux accepts it 's place in the computer world .
Not a troll just a realist .
I was an early fan and saw the potential of Linux .
For at least ten of those years I have constantly heard that Linux is going to became users friendly and easy to use , install and maintain .
I 've finally become a realist and accepted Linux has found it 's place and it is n't going to change .
It 's an exceptional server and works great as a workstation in companies large enough to have dedicated support people .
It 's great for tinkerers and has a lot of power and flexibility for the hobbyist and power users .
For the average user it simply is n't going to happen .
Unless an Apple sized company embraces it and puts the resources into bringing it mainstream there are simply too many problems for regular people to deal with .
Like I say I was an early fan but people waiting for it to take over are kidding themselves .
I 'm a big fan of the open source model but it also shows it 's limitations the fact that there simply are n't enough people contributing to write the drivers needed to support all the hardware out there and software developers are caught in the catch-22 of developing for a platform few people use but could be bigger if there was more software .
There will always be support much as Unix never went away and it still has the potential to go mainstream I just would n't hold my breath .
Ironically as much venom as there tends to be towards Mac it 's probably the closest you are likely to see in the mainstream to Linux .
I still consider it a risky but critical move when Apple developed OSX .
It cost them some customer support early on but there is no way Mac would be as big as it is now without OSX .
Linux absolutely could do a Mac like growth but until some one with deep pockets takes it on it 's pretty much found it 's market share .
At least in the US and most of the developed world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cellphone2012 the year Linux accepts it's place in the computer world.
Not a troll just a realist.
I was an early fan and saw the potential of Linux.
For at least ten of those years I have constantly heard that Linux is going to became users friendly and easy to use, install and maintain.
I've finally become a realist and accepted Linux has found it's place and it isn't going to change.
It's an exceptional server and works great as a workstation in companies large enough to have dedicated support people.
It's great for tinkerers and has a lot of power and flexibility for the hobbyist and power users.
For the average user it simply isn't going to happen.
Unless an Apple sized company embraces it and puts the resources into bringing it mainstream there are simply too many problems for regular people to deal with.
Like I say I was an early fan but people waiting for it to take over are kidding themselves.
I'm a big fan of the open source model but it also shows it's limitations the fact that there simply aren't enough people contributing to write the drivers needed to support all the hardware out there and software developers are caught in the catch-22 of developing for a platform few people use but could be bigger if there was more software.
There will always be support much as Unix never went away and it still has the potential to go mainstream I just wouldn't hold my breath.
Ironically as much venom as there tends to be towards Mac it's probably the closest you are likely to see in the mainstream to Linux.
I still consider it a risky but critical move when Apple developed OSX.
It cost them some customer support early on but there is no way Mac would be as big as it is now without OSX.
Linux absolutely could do a Mac like growth but until some one with deep pockets takes it on it's pretty much found it's market share.
At least in the US and most of the developed world.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159796</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There may be 100,000 apps, but 95\% of those are useless crap and of the remaining 5\%, 80\% of THOSE tend to duplicate each other's functionality.  Whether Android or any other phone can compete in sheer numbers isn't really relevant so long as it covers the main types of apps people want.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There may be 100,000 apps , but 95 \ % of those are useless crap and of the remaining 5 \ % , 80 \ % of THOSE tend to duplicate each other 's functionality .
Whether Android or any other phone can compete in sheer numbers is n't really relevant so long as it covers the main types of apps people want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There may be 100,000 apps, but 95\% of those are useless crap and of the remaining 5\%, 80\% of THOSE tend to duplicate each other's functionality.
Whether Android or any other phone can compete in sheer numbers isn't really relevant so long as it covers the main types of apps people want.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163764</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>Bill\_the\_Engineer</author>
	<datestamp>1258626300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As a software engineer, things like the iPhone approval process make me very nervous about investing quite a bit of time and money into a project, especially if the process is overly opaque.</p></div></blockquote><p>As a software engineer you <b>should</b> love the approval process. In fact you should love all development processes, you live and die by the process.
</p><p>Now the code slingers may object to the process...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a software engineer , things like the iPhone approval process make me very nervous about investing quite a bit of time and money into a project , especially if the process is overly opaque.As a software engineer you should love the approval process .
In fact you should love all development processes , you live and die by the process .
Now the code slingers may object to the process... ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a software engineer, things like the iPhone approval process make me very nervous about investing quite a bit of time and money into a project, especially if the process is overly opaque.As a software engineer you should love the approval process.
In fact you should love all development processes, you live and die by the process.
Now the code slingers may object to the process... ;)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159696</id>
	<title>Isn't that the point?</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1258656720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I'm a full time iPhone developer. I'm going no-where."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 'm a full time iPhone developer .
I 'm going no-where .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I'm a full time iPhone developer.
I'm going no-where.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159134</id>
	<title>Re:Leaving the mac store?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, but it is stuck in the approval process.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but it is stuck in the approval process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but it is stuck in the approval process.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159882</id>
	<title>Re:So the flee ...</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1258657140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Where there's money</p></div><p>Actually, that's what seems to be the problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where there 's moneyActually , that 's what seems to be the problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where there's moneyActually, that's what seems to be the problem.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160162</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1258657980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When any app can be rejected for any reason at any time by someone who is for practical purposes anonymous and answerable to nobody and the process has a reputation for being capricious and arbitrary, nobody wants to risk a significant development cost on AppStore acceptance.</p><p>Economically, the most likely to turn a profit are a series of $0.99 throwaways that might become the next "pet rock". If it's rejected by some guy because his corn flakes got soggy that morning, little is lost. Statistically, some of them will certainly be accepted.</p><p>Add in that Apple has ALSO gained a reputation for rejecting anything more useful or more polished than their own iPhone apps and you create a huge disincentive to spending a lot of time and energy on an iPhone app.</p><p>Developers who want to spend a lot of time and energy on a killer app will tend to target a platform where they are certain to be able to market the result. If successful there, they *might* decide to risk the cost of porting to the iPhone. In making the decision, they will consider that the more "killer" the app is, the more likely Apple is to decide it threatens their platform dominance and kill it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When any app can be rejected for any reason at any time by someone who is for practical purposes anonymous and answerable to nobody and the process has a reputation for being capricious and arbitrary , nobody wants to risk a significant development cost on AppStore acceptance.Economically , the most likely to turn a profit are a series of $ 0.99 throwaways that might become the next " pet rock " .
If it 's rejected by some guy because his corn flakes got soggy that morning , little is lost .
Statistically , some of them will certainly be accepted.Add in that Apple has ALSO gained a reputation for rejecting anything more useful or more polished than their own iPhone apps and you create a huge disincentive to spending a lot of time and energy on an iPhone app.Developers who want to spend a lot of time and energy on a killer app will tend to target a platform where they are certain to be able to market the result .
If successful there , they * might * decide to risk the cost of porting to the iPhone .
In making the decision , they will consider that the more " killer " the app is , the more likely Apple is to decide it threatens their platform dominance and kill it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When any app can be rejected for any reason at any time by someone who is for practical purposes anonymous and answerable to nobody and the process has a reputation for being capricious and arbitrary, nobody wants to risk a significant development cost on AppStore acceptance.Economically, the most likely to turn a profit are a series of $0.99 throwaways that might become the next "pet rock".
If it's rejected by some guy because his corn flakes got soggy that morning, little is lost.
Statistically, some of them will certainly be accepted.Add in that Apple has ALSO gained a reputation for rejecting anything more useful or more polished than their own iPhone apps and you create a huge disincentive to spending a lot of time and energy on an iPhone app.Developers who want to spend a lot of time and energy on a killer app will tend to target a platform where they are certain to be able to market the result.
If successful there, they *might* decide to risk the cost of porting to the iPhone.
In making the decision, they will consider that the more "killer" the app is, the more likely Apple is to decide it threatens their platform dominance and kill it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30169524</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>indiechild</author>
	<datestamp>1258717260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you look at the list of top grossing apps, most of them cost more than $0.99 -- it's definitely a case of the best and most useful app wins. You gotta think quality, not quantity. If you slave away on making a great app and then price it at $0.99, you're basically just throwing time and money away. I think the smart developers realise this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you look at the list of top grossing apps , most of them cost more than $ 0.99 -- it 's definitely a case of the best and most useful app wins .
You got ta think quality , not quantity .
If you slave away on making a great app and then price it at $ 0.99 , you 're basically just throwing time and money away .
I think the smart developers realise this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you look at the list of top grossing apps, most of them cost more than $0.99 -- it's definitely a case of the best and most useful app wins.
You gotta think quality, not quantity.
If you slave away on making a great app and then price it at $0.99, you're basically just throwing time and money away.
I think the smart developers realise this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160162</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166522</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1258637100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the irony!  The exact opposite of what the guy said is true!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the irony !
The exact opposite of what the guy said is true !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the irony!
The exact opposite of what the guy said is true!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159982</id>
	<title>disingenuous on your part</title>
	<author>manekineko2</author>
	<datestamp>1258657380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your post is pretty disingenuous I think but you still managed to get the 5.</p><p>As others have noted, you are the one not reading carefully, as there are 3 mentioned in just the article.  I don't know that any type of support for claiming "others" exist is even necessary, as I don't doubt that this is not a complete list of developers fleeing the app store.</p><p>Furthermore, calling Joe Hewitt the developer of "a facebook app.  ONE facebook app" is ridiculous.  He is not only the developer of ONE just any facebook app, he was the developer of THE ONE official facebook app.  Calling the reporter out in that type of deceptive manner is basically shameless pandering to mods that don't know the backstory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your post is pretty disingenuous I think but you still managed to get the 5.As others have noted , you are the one not reading carefully , as there are 3 mentioned in just the article .
I do n't know that any type of support for claiming " others " exist is even necessary , as I do n't doubt that this is not a complete list of developers fleeing the app store.Furthermore , calling Joe Hewitt the developer of " a facebook app .
ONE facebook app " is ridiculous .
He is not only the developer of ONE just any facebook app , he was the developer of THE ONE official facebook app .
Calling the reporter out in that type of deceptive manner is basically shameless pandering to mods that do n't know the backstory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your post is pretty disingenuous I think but you still managed to get the 5.As others have noted, you are the one not reading carefully, as there are 3 mentioned in just the article.
I don't know that any type of support for claiming "others" exist is even necessary, as I don't doubt that this is not a complete list of developers fleeing the app store.Furthermore, calling Joe Hewitt the developer of "a facebook app.
ONE facebook app" is ridiculous.
He is not only the developer of ONE just any facebook app, he was the developer of THE ONE official facebook app.
Calling the reporter out in that type of deceptive manner is basically shameless pandering to mods that don't know the backstory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165666</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>Volguus Zildrohar</author>
	<datestamp>1258633140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm a hobbiest iPhone developer.</p></div><p>Rubbish.  I'm way more hobby than you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a hobbiest iPhone developer.Rubbish .
I 'm way more hobby than you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a hobbiest iPhone developer.Rubbish.
I'm way more hobby than you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30177866</id>
	<title>Re:Dear fleeing developers.</title>
	<author>Cederic</author>
	<datestamp>1258713720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the fuck? The n900 is already available in the US. In fact, at this precise moment in time, it's ONLY available in the US.</p><p>And of course, since you can download and install software from the 'net using the device itself, without even going near Nokia's store, developers can sell through the store and also directly through their own websites should they choose.</p><p>Disclaimer: I'm waiting for the n900 to go on sale in the UK so I can replace my Android phone. Yeah, I'm biased against Apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the fuck ?
The n900 is already available in the US .
In fact , at this precise moment in time , it 's ONLY available in the US.And of course , since you can download and install software from the 'net using the device itself , without even going near Nokia 's store , developers can sell through the store and also directly through their own websites should they choose.Disclaimer : I 'm waiting for the n900 to go on sale in the UK so I can replace my Android phone .
Yeah , I 'm biased against Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the fuck?
The n900 is already available in the US.
In fact, at this precise moment in time, it's ONLY available in the US.And of course, since you can download and install software from the 'net using the device itself, without even going near Nokia's store, developers can sell through the store and also directly through their own websites should they choose.Disclaimer: I'm waiting for the n900 to go on sale in the UK so I can replace my Android phone.
Yeah, I'm biased against Apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990</id>
	<title>I want to join in!</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1258654380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want to join the protest against iPhone apps. Is there an app for that?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want to join the protest against iPhone apps .
Is there an app for that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want to join the protest against iPhone apps.
Is there an app for that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162242</id>
	<title>itunes</title>
	<author>Spaham</author>
	<datestamp>1258621560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For me as an iphone user, the biggest problem is the app "browser" or the app store.<br>It is very slow, very cumbersome to find things.<br>There are supposedly 100k apps, but somehow I can only get 100 games to show up<br>on my phone's appstore, in a specific section. And when you install one app and go<br>back to the store, the list has forgotten your position, so you have to reload everything...<br>Mac's app store isn't any better. No real way to see big lists quicky, sort with keywords, compare...<br>Apps abuse keywords, some have a hundred keywords just to attract searches. This should be enforced<br>(and get your app stalled for a couple weeks).</p><p>As a developer, I hate to see so many people copying other apps. It makes me very nervous to<br>imagine having a great new idea, and to find out that 10 other apps do the same things a few weeks/months<br>afterwards. And, relating to what I said earlier, I'm not really sure that people get to even see<br>all the available apps.</p><p>But, to get back to the headers here, there are millions of iPhones out there.<br>thousands of apps. This is just the beginning. Try to picture it in ten years.<br>Would you flee from such a big market just because there are too many devs ?<br>Sounds silly to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For me as an iphone user , the biggest problem is the app " browser " or the app store.It is very slow , very cumbersome to find things.There are supposedly 100k apps , but somehow I can only get 100 games to show upon my phone 's appstore , in a specific section .
And when you install one app and goback to the store , the list has forgotten your position , so you have to reload everything...Mac 's app store is n't any better .
No real way to see big lists quicky , sort with keywords , compare...Apps abuse keywords , some have a hundred keywords just to attract searches .
This should be enforced ( and get your app stalled for a couple weeks ) .As a developer , I hate to see so many people copying other apps .
It makes me very nervous toimagine having a great new idea , and to find out that 10 other apps do the same things a few weeks/monthsafterwards .
And , relating to what I said earlier , I 'm not really sure that people get to even seeall the available apps.But , to get back to the headers here , there are millions of iPhones out there.thousands of apps .
This is just the beginning .
Try to picture it in ten years.Would you flee from such a big market just because there are too many devs ? Sounds silly to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For me as an iphone user, the biggest problem is the app "browser" or the app store.It is very slow, very cumbersome to find things.There are supposedly 100k apps, but somehow I can only get 100 games to show upon my phone's appstore, in a specific section.
And when you install one app and goback to the store, the list has forgotten your position, so you have to reload everything...Mac's app store isn't any better.
No real way to see big lists quicky, sort with keywords, compare...Apps abuse keywords, some have a hundred keywords just to attract searches.
This should be enforced(and get your app stalled for a couple weeks).As a developer, I hate to see so many people copying other apps.
It makes me very nervous toimagine having a great new idea, and to find out that 10 other apps do the same things a few weeks/monthsafterwards.
And, relating to what I said earlier, I'm not really sure that people get to even seeall the available apps.But, to get back to the headers here, there are millions of iPhones out there.thousands of apps.
This is just the beginning.
Try to picture it in ten years.Would you flee from such a big market just because there are too many devs ?Sounds silly to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161502</id>
	<title>Re:Not lower quality apps.</title>
	<author>IamTheRealMike</author>
	<datestamp>1258662300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's the relationship between being slavishly dedicated to one platform and being good at what you do? All of the excellent programmers I know are fluent in multiple technologies, and most of them have a good understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of each one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the relationship between being slavishly dedicated to one platform and being good at what you do ?
All of the excellent programmers I know are fluent in multiple technologies , and most of them have a good understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of each one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the relationship between being slavishly dedicated to one platform and being good at what you do?
All of the excellent programmers I know are fluent in multiple technologies, and most of them have a good understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of each one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159188</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161358</id>
	<title>I thought this was about Android Market at first</title>
	<author>doojsdad</author>
	<datestamp>1258661880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a part time Android developer I'm debating jumping ship too. This article sums it up nicely: <a href="http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/11/android-fragmentation/" title="wired.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/11/android-fragmentation/</a> [wired.com]

Between dealing with the SDK idiocy of Google, complaint emails from users of 10 different phones all running a different version of Android, and the shitty design of Market itself, the last sentence echoes my thoughts: &ldquo;I will have to decide then how much return I am getting and if it is worth it.&rdquo;

There has got to be some kind of happy medium between the anarchy of Market and the totalitarianism of App Store.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a part time Android developer I 'm debating jumping ship too .
This article sums it up nicely : http : //www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/11/android-fragmentation/ [ wired.com ] Between dealing with the SDK idiocy of Google , complaint emails from users of 10 different phones all running a different version of Android , and the shitty design of Market itself , the last sentence echoes my thoughts :    I will have to decide then how much return I am getting and if it is worth it.    There has got to be some kind of happy medium between the anarchy of Market and the totalitarianism of App Store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a part time Android developer I'm debating jumping ship too.
This article sums it up nicely: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/11/android-fragmentation/ [wired.com]

Between dealing with the SDK idiocy of Google, complaint emails from users of 10 different phones all running a different version of Android, and the shitty design of Market itself, the last sentence echoes my thoughts: “I will have to decide then how much return I am getting and if it is worth it.”

There has got to be some kind of happy medium between the anarchy of Market and the totalitarianism of App Store.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163668</id>
	<title>Re:Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>rinoid</author>
	<datestamp>1258626000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well put MVC1977<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...

or rather, I'd LOVE to have a limited vision which created 30 billion in cash. I mean that would just rot now wouldn't it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well put MVC1977 .. . or rather , I 'd LOVE to have a limited vision which created 30 billion in cash .
I mean that would just rot now would n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well put MVC1977 ...

or rather, I'd LOVE to have a limited vision which created 30 billion in cash.
I mean that would just rot now wouldn't it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163064</id>
	<title>Re:Google Voice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258624320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure how the app store rejection is preventing you from using Google Voice easily. You can load it and use all of the features from mobile Safari quite easily. I have GVMobile loaded on my jailbroken iPhone and every feature available from within GVMobile is available on the Google Voice page from within Safari just as quickly and easily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure how the app store rejection is preventing you from using Google Voice easily .
You can load it and use all of the features from mobile Safari quite easily .
I have GVMobile loaded on my jailbroken iPhone and every feature available from within GVMobile is available on the Google Voice page from within Safari just as quickly and easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure how the app store rejection is preventing you from using Google Voice easily.
You can load it and use all of the features from mobile Safari quite easily.
I have GVMobile loaded on my jailbroken iPhone and every feature available from within GVMobile is available on the Google Voice page from within Safari just as quickly and easily.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160438</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258658880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While you are doing the math....</p><p>A few months back it surfaced that a Pakistani company was submitting a couple apps a DAY... and Apple was approving them.  They were $5 apps which were complete garbage, like "WWF News" where they would steal wrestling news off the web, violating copyrights, and package it as an app.  With app names designed to draw in customers they could count on at least some sales, and Apple no doubt took a cut, for apps that were complete garbage.  Before Apple finally developed a clue and took them down for copyright infringement they had something like 800 apps on the app store.  There was another company doing the same thing with something approaching a 1000 apps.</p><p>So when everyone throws out that 100,000 apps number, do the math, and realize a large percentage of those are garbage.</p><p>The other moral of this tale is that Apple is blocking and frustrating apps trying to do useful things including Google Voice while they were gleefully approving two apps a day, and taking a cut, from a company that was doing NOTHING but ripping people off.  That is the definition of "arbitrary".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While you are doing the math....A few months back it surfaced that a Pakistani company was submitting a couple apps a DAY... and Apple was approving them .
They were $ 5 apps which were complete garbage , like " WWF News " where they would steal wrestling news off the web , violating copyrights , and package it as an app .
With app names designed to draw in customers they could count on at least some sales , and Apple no doubt took a cut , for apps that were complete garbage .
Before Apple finally developed a clue and took them down for copyright infringement they had something like 800 apps on the app store .
There was another company doing the same thing with something approaching a 1000 apps.So when everyone throws out that 100,000 apps number , do the math , and realize a large percentage of those are garbage.The other moral of this tale is that Apple is blocking and frustrating apps trying to do useful things including Google Voice while they were gleefully approving two apps a day , and taking a cut , from a company that was doing NOTHING but ripping people off .
That is the definition of " arbitrary " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While you are doing the math....A few months back it surfaced that a Pakistani company was submitting a couple apps a DAY... and Apple was approving them.
They were $5 apps which were complete garbage, like "WWF News" where they would steal wrestling news off the web, violating copyrights, and package it as an app.
With app names designed to draw in customers they could count on at least some sales, and Apple no doubt took a cut, for apps that were complete garbage.
Before Apple finally developed a clue and took them down for copyright infringement they had something like 800 apps on the app store.
There was another company doing the same thing with something approaching a 1000 apps.So when everyone throws out that 100,000 apps number, do the math, and realize a large percentage of those are garbage.The other moral of this tale is that Apple is blocking and frustrating apps trying to do useful things including Google Voice while they were gleefully approving two apps a day, and taking a cut, from a company that was doing NOTHING but ripping people off.
That is the definition of "arbitrary".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30168232</id>
	<title>Re:Approval vs Sales</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258653300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>from the summary, I gathered that it is about opacity of the approval process and lack of channels to negotiate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>from the summary , I gathered that it is about opacity of the approval process and lack of channels to negotiate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from the summary, I gathered that it is about opacity of the approval process and lack of channels to negotiate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159678</id>
	<title>Re:Cry wolf</title>
	<author>localman</author>
	<datestamp>1258656660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sorry, everyone knows that Apple likes total and complete control</p></div><p>I hear this and I hear people buying into it and it's just a foolish statement.  I can develop whatever I want for OSX and that works out just fine.  Sure, Apple tends to be a controlling company, but their flagship product is so useful precisely because it isn't overly controlled.  Hell, they embraced a UNIX underpinning and let people run X-Windows and Windows/Fusion stuff now.  And it's great -- that flexibility is a huge part of what I like about OSX.</p><p>The iPhone approval process isn't so bad as to kill things (as this article implies), but it's a disadvantage.  Restricting a platform/OS is always a disadvantage.  Currently the iPhone has enough other advantages that it doesn't matter, and maybe it'll stay that way.  But it's still stupid.</p><p>Oh, and the article named three developers (two people and one compnay) so "all" is appropriate and "developers (people) and others (company)" is also appropriate.  If you're going to read the sentence carefully, as you said.  I agree though that they're trying to make far more out of it than it is.</p><p>Cheers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , everyone knows that Apple likes total and complete controlI hear this and I hear people buying into it and it 's just a foolish statement .
I can develop whatever I want for OSX and that works out just fine .
Sure , Apple tends to be a controlling company , but their flagship product is so useful precisely because it is n't overly controlled .
Hell , they embraced a UNIX underpinning and let people run X-Windows and Windows/Fusion stuff now .
And it 's great -- that flexibility is a huge part of what I like about OSX.The iPhone approval process is n't so bad as to kill things ( as this article implies ) , but it 's a disadvantage .
Restricting a platform/OS is always a disadvantage .
Currently the iPhone has enough other advantages that it does n't matter , and maybe it 'll stay that way .
But it 's still stupid.Oh , and the article named three developers ( two people and one compnay ) so " all " is appropriate and " developers ( people ) and others ( company ) " is also appropriate .
If you 're going to read the sentence carefully , as you said .
I agree though that they 're trying to make far more out of it than it is.Cheers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, everyone knows that Apple likes total and complete controlI hear this and I hear people buying into it and it's just a foolish statement.
I can develop whatever I want for OSX and that works out just fine.
Sure, Apple tends to be a controlling company, but their flagship product is so useful precisely because it isn't overly controlled.
Hell, they embraced a UNIX underpinning and let people run X-Windows and Windows/Fusion stuff now.
And it's great -- that flexibility is a huge part of what I like about OSX.The iPhone approval process isn't so bad as to kill things (as this article implies), but it's a disadvantage.
Restricting a platform/OS is always a disadvantage.
Currently the iPhone has enough other advantages that it doesn't matter, and maybe it'll stay that way.
But it's still stupid.Oh, and the article named three developers (two people and one compnay) so "all" is appropriate and "developers (people) and others (company)" is also appropriate.
If you're going to read the sentence carefully, as you said.
I agree though that they're trying to make far more out of it than it is.Cheers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159664</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>ShakaUVM</author>
	<datestamp>1258656600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps they're leaving because there's 100,000 apps in the store, so many of which are out and out horrible that it drowns out any possible quality product unless you have a large marketing budget or can get lucky enough to crack one of the top 10 lists.</p><p>Or they might just prefer working in a more open enviroment, which is what it sounds like. As a software engineer, things like the iPhone approval process make me very nervous about investing quite a bit of time and money into a project, especially if the process is overly opaque. I've worked with large corporations on getting software approved before, and usually it is more of a cooperative process.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps they 're leaving because there 's 100,000 apps in the store , so many of which are out and out horrible that it drowns out any possible quality product unless you have a large marketing budget or can get lucky enough to crack one of the top 10 lists.Or they might just prefer working in a more open enviroment , which is what it sounds like .
As a software engineer , things like the iPhone approval process make me very nervous about investing quite a bit of time and money into a project , especially if the process is overly opaque .
I 've worked with large corporations on getting software approved before , and usually it is more of a cooperative process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps they're leaving because there's 100,000 apps in the store, so many of which are out and out horrible that it drowns out any possible quality product unless you have a large marketing budget or can get lucky enough to crack one of the top 10 lists.Or they might just prefer working in a more open enviroment, which is what it sounds like.
As a software engineer, things like the iPhone approval process make me very nervous about investing quite a bit of time and money into a project, especially if the process is overly opaque.
I've worked with large corporations on getting software approved before, and usually it is more of a cooperative process.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159716</id>
	<title>Niche Niche Niche</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple likes to control user experience, and that won't change. That is their niche. They may relax their review process a little bit if there's a backlash, but they won't change their spots. Other phone brands will probably take up the cowboy coders who don't like red tape because they want to catch up to Apple's offerings. Their more relaxed review process will probably result in cheaper and perhaps more varied apps. However, it will be just like the Windows world compared to the Mac world:<br>* more choice<br>* lower prices<br>* more hackers<br>* more chaos<br>* more bugs<br>* inconsistent UI<br>Same as it always was.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple likes to control user experience , and that wo n't change .
That is their niche .
They may relax their review process a little bit if there 's a backlash , but they wo n't change their spots .
Other phone brands will probably take up the cowboy coders who do n't like red tape because they want to catch up to Apple 's offerings .
Their more relaxed review process will probably result in cheaper and perhaps more varied apps .
However , it will be just like the Windows world compared to the Mac world : * more choice * lower prices * more hackers * more chaos * more bugs * inconsistent UISame as it always was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple likes to control user experience, and that won't change.
That is their niche.
They may relax their review process a little bit if there's a backlash, but they won't change their spots.
Other phone brands will probably take up the cowboy coders who don't like red tape because they want to catch up to Apple's offerings.
Their more relaxed review process will probably result in cheaper and perhaps more varied apps.
However, it will be just like the Windows world compared to the Mac world:* more choice* lower prices* more hackers* more chaos* more bugs* inconsistent UISame as it always was.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165416</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>R3d M3rcury</author>
	<datestamp>1258632000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Circa 2002:  Windows has 96\% of the market.  Apple has 2\%.  Somehow, I'm not particularly concerned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Circa 2002 : Windows has 96 \ % of the market .
Apple has 2 \ % .
Somehow , I 'm not particularly concerned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Circa 2002:  Windows has 96\% of the market.
Apple has 2\%.
Somehow, I'm not particularly concerned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160672</id>
	<title>I Want to Buy An iTouch, But It's Not Gonna Happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258659480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In spite of having been a programmer all my life, with Apple Pascal on a 16k language card in an Apple IIe being one of my earlier platforms, and having resurrected a friend's dead iMac logic board by converting it to use an ATX power supply (yes, with soft boot no less!) I've never actually plunked down a lump of cash for an Apple product.  I want that to change now.  I want to buy an iTouch because they're so cool, and the very first app that I want to buy is the Baby Shaker, because it's so hilarious.  However, I can't, because of censorship.  It is truly bizarre.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In spite of having been a programmer all my life , with Apple Pascal on a 16k language card in an Apple IIe being one of my earlier platforms , and having resurrected a friend 's dead iMac logic board by converting it to use an ATX power supply ( yes , with soft boot no less !
) I 've never actually plunked down a lump of cash for an Apple product .
I want that to change now .
I want to buy an iTouch because they 're so cool , and the very first app that I want to buy is the Baby Shaker , because it 's so hilarious .
However , I ca n't , because of censorship .
It is truly bizarre .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In spite of having been a programmer all my life, with Apple Pascal on a 16k language card in an Apple IIe being one of my earlier platforms, and having resurrected a friend's dead iMac logic board by converting it to use an ATX power supply (yes, with soft boot no less!
) I've never actually plunked down a lump of cash for an Apple product.
I want that to change now.
I want to buy an iTouch because they're so cool, and the very first app that I want to buy is the Baby Shaker, because it's so hilarious.
However, I can't, because of censorship.
It is truly bizarre.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161534</id>
	<title>I guess these developers hate money.</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1258662420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Running away from a market that has an itchy trigger finger on the buy button every time a new app comes out...</p><p>not a good idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Running away from a market that has an itchy trigger finger on the buy button every time a new app comes out...not a good idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Running away from a market that has an itchy trigger finger on the buy button every time a new app comes out...not a good idea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161442</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>IamTheRealMike</author>
	<datestamp>1258662120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hewitt is the one man band behind <b>the</b> most popular app for the iPhone. Not a random app, not a popular app, <b>the most popular app</b>. As many have pointed out, not all apps are created equal. One Facebook app is worth 1000 fart apps.</p><p>BTW the article says Hewitts departure was due to something he can't talk about. Remember Apple forbids you to discuss rejected apps. Perhaps Facebook was working on some cool new app or feature that Apple rejected? We'll never know. Would we know the story behind the Latitude and Google Voice rejections if not for the FCC?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hewitt is the one man band behind the most popular app for the iPhone .
Not a random app , not a popular app , the most popular app .
As many have pointed out , not all apps are created equal .
One Facebook app is worth 1000 fart apps.BTW the article says Hewitts departure was due to something he ca n't talk about .
Remember Apple forbids you to discuss rejected apps .
Perhaps Facebook was working on some cool new app or feature that Apple rejected ?
We 'll never know .
Would we know the story behind the Latitude and Google Voice rejections if not for the FCC ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hewitt is the one man band behind the most popular app for the iPhone.
Not a random app, not a popular app, the most popular app.
As many have pointed out, not all apps are created equal.
One Facebook app is worth 1000 fart apps.BTW the article says Hewitts departure was due to something he can't talk about.
Remember Apple forbids you to discuss rejected apps.
Perhaps Facebook was working on some cool new app or feature that Apple rejected?
We'll never know.
Would we know the story behind the Latitude and Google Voice rejections if not for the FCC?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163232</id>
	<title>Cydia</title>
	<author>rgviza</author>
	<datestamp>1258624800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; "...continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software."<br>Either that or a rise of quality software in Cydia. xGPS, Google Voice, and lots of other stuff are already there after being shot down by the app store. I use xGPS at least 3x a week and experience none of the problems reported by Tom-Tom users who didn't buy the TT hardware mount. Google voice has personally revolutionized my calling services.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; " ...continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software .
" Either that or a rise of quality software in Cydia .
xGPS , Google Voice , and lots of other stuff are already there after being shot down by the app store .
I use xGPS at least 3x a week and experience none of the problems reported by Tom-Tom users who did n't buy the TT hardware mount .
Google voice has personally revolutionized my calling services .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; "...continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software.
"Either that or a rise of quality software in Cydia.
xGPS, Google Voice, and lots of other stuff are already there after being shot down by the app store.
I use xGPS at least 3x a week and experience none of the problems reported by Tom-Tom users who didn't buy the TT hardware mount.
Google voice has personally revolutionized my calling services.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159616</id>
	<title>Re:2010 Year of the linux</title>
	<author>jim\_v2000</author>
	<datestamp>1258656480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>People who use the iPhone don't care about things like this.
<br> <br>
And I'm going to put forward that the approval process has less to do with developers leaving than the fact that the iPhone app market is quite saturated and the Android market is not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People who use the iPhone do n't care about things like this .
And I 'm going to put forward that the approval process has less to do with developers leaving than the fact that the iPhone app market is quite saturated and the Android market is not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People who use the iPhone don't care about things like this.
And I'm going to put forward that the approval process has less to do with developers leaving than the fact that the iPhone app market is quite saturated and the Android market is not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159888</id>
	<title>History all over again!</title>
	<author>donstenk</author>
	<datestamp>1258657140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this made me laugh.</p><p>In fact the analogy used is good, but there is one better based on fact: back in the eighties IBM licensed it's hardware, ensuring anyone could create an IBM compatible PC, Apple, Commodore and others did not. This is the reason the PC became the dominant platform eventually. As they included an obscure cheap little OS (DOS) from Microsoft, MS benefitted greatly from the spreading of the platform.</p><p>Today IBM, the creator of the 'personal computer' as we know it, no longer makes them. Apple was on it's knees at the end of the nineties and needed saveing from bankrupcy by a loan from<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... Microsoft, who I believe still own Apple shares. Commodore is dead, and Apple makes PC's with Intel chips.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this made me laugh.In fact the analogy used is good , but there is one better based on fact : back in the eighties IBM licensed it 's hardware , ensuring anyone could create an IBM compatible PC , Apple , Commodore and others did not .
This is the reason the PC became the dominant platform eventually .
As they included an obscure cheap little OS ( DOS ) from Microsoft , MS benefitted greatly from the spreading of the platform.Today IBM , the creator of the 'personal computer ' as we know it , no longer makes them .
Apple was on it 's knees at the end of the nineties and needed saveing from bankrupcy by a loan from .... Microsoft , who I believe still own Apple shares .
Commodore is dead , and Apple makes PC 's with Intel chips .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this made me laugh.In fact the analogy used is good, but there is one better based on fact: back in the eighties IBM licensed it's hardware, ensuring anyone could create an IBM compatible PC, Apple, Commodore and others did not.
This is the reason the PC became the dominant platform eventually.
As they included an obscure cheap little OS (DOS) from Microsoft, MS benefitted greatly from the spreading of the platform.Today IBM, the creator of the 'personal computer' as we know it, no longer makes them.
Apple was on it's knees at the end of the nineties and needed saveing from bankrupcy by a loan from .... Microsoft, who I believe still own Apple shares.
Commodore is dead, and Apple makes PC's with Intel chips.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159420</id>
	<title>Thank God I own a Blackberry</title>
	<author>scottbomb</author>
	<datestamp>1258655760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is one of the many reasons I bought the 'berry instead. I can purchase whatever apps I want from whomever I want. I bought it, I paid for it, it's MY smartphone, I'll do what I want with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one of the many reasons I bought the 'berry instead .
I can purchase whatever apps I want from whomever I want .
I bought it , I paid for it , it 's MY smartphone , I 'll do what I want with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one of the many reasons I bought the 'berry instead.
I can purchase whatever apps I want from whomever I want.
I bought it, I paid for it, it's MY smartphone, I'll do what I want with it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30170024</id>
	<title>Re:History all over again!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258725120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>this made me laugh.</p><p>In fact the analogy used is good, but there is one better based on fact: back in the eighties IBM licensed it's hardware, ensuring anyone could create an IBM compatible PC, Apple, Commodore and others did not. This is the reason the PC became the dominant platform eventually.</p></div><p>If only your story wasn't utter and complete bullshit - IBM did <b>not</b> license it hardware, instead it was so primitive anyone could just copy it - and once Compaq reverse-engineer the BIOS, they were actually 100\% compatible all of a sudden.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>this made me laugh.In fact the analogy used is good , but there is one better based on fact : back in the eighties IBM licensed it 's hardware , ensuring anyone could create an IBM compatible PC , Apple , Commodore and others did not .
This is the reason the PC became the dominant platform eventually.If only your story was n't utter and complete bullshit - IBM did not license it hardware , instead it was so primitive anyone could just copy it - and once Compaq reverse-engineer the BIOS , they were actually 100 \ % compatible all of a sudden .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this made me laugh.In fact the analogy used is good, but there is one better based on fact: back in the eighties IBM licensed it's hardware, ensuring anyone could create an IBM compatible PC, Apple, Commodore and others did not.
This is the reason the PC became the dominant platform eventually.If only your story wasn't utter and complete bullshit - IBM did not license it hardware, instead it was so primitive anyone could just copy it - and once Compaq reverse-engineer the BIOS, they were actually 100\% compatible all of a sudden.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162048</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258664100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only ones to "stick it out" are the ones who are the most likely to profit.  This tends to be apps people mostly want.</p></div><p>Um hmmm. And the Market Fairy will come flitting along and make Everything All Right.</p><p>Profitability has absolutely nothing to do with that, except that some people will do anything to make a buck. Including peddling trash to anyone gullible enough to cough up the cash. Consider the enduring nature of spam.</p><p>In actual fact, I could make a fairly credible claim that if Apple makes their world too hostile, only those people who simply don't care will remain to develop. We already know that cheap (censored) tends to outsell expensive quality. Everyday.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only ones to " stick it out " are the ones who are the most likely to profit .
This tends to be apps people mostly want.Um hmmm .
And the Market Fairy will come flitting along and make Everything All Right.Profitability has absolutely nothing to do with that , except that some people will do anything to make a buck .
Including peddling trash to anyone gullible enough to cough up the cash .
Consider the enduring nature of spam.In actual fact , I could make a fairly credible claim that if Apple makes their world too hostile , only those people who simply do n't care will remain to develop .
We already know that cheap ( censored ) tends to outsell expensive quality .
Everyday .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only ones to "stick it out" are the ones who are the most likely to profit.
This tends to be apps people mostly want.Um hmmm.
And the Market Fairy will come flitting along and make Everything All Right.Profitability has absolutely nothing to do with that, except that some people will do anything to make a buck.
Including peddling trash to anyone gullible enough to cough up the cash.
Consider the enduring nature of spam.In actual fact, I could make a fairly credible claim that if Apple makes their world too hostile, only those people who simply don't care will remain to develop.
We already know that cheap (censored) tends to outsell expensive quality.
Everyday.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159988</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258657380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, but if you subtract all of the fart apps, there are only about 10 apps left.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but if you subtract all of the fart apps , there are only about 10 apps left .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but if you subtract all of the fart apps, there are only about 10 apps left.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158904</id>
	<title>They are all writing for Windows now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same story... "Hi, I'm Mac guy, and I've got nothing to do...because I have no software..."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same story... " Hi , I 'm Mac guy , and I 've got nothing to do...because I have no software... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same story... "Hi, I'm Mac guy, and I've got nothing to do...because I have no software..."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161074</id>
	<title>Re:Cry wolf</title>
	<author>DigitalCrackPipe</author>
	<datestamp>1258660860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hate to break it to you, but you just asked us to carefully read a sentence listing three developers, and then you claim that there are two.  A little ironic as you are harping on the article for exagerating the extent of the exodus...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hate to break it to you , but you just asked us to carefully read a sentence listing three developers , and then you claim that there are two .
A little ironic as you are harping on the article for exagerating the extent of the exodus.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hate to break it to you, but you just asked us to carefully read a sentence listing three developers, and then you claim that there are two.
A little ironic as you are harping on the article for exagerating the extent of the exodus...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162714</id>
	<title>N900: Linux apps? shipping yet?  Is it still $550?</title>
	<author>KWTm</author>
	<datestamp>1258623120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The N900 is about to be launched. Come on over to <a href="http://www.maemo.org/" title="maemo.org">http://www.maemo.org/</a> [maemo.org]<br>You will be welcome, and no one will tell you what you can, or cannot do.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm interested in knowing more about this.  Do N900 applications need to be ported or can we just grab stuff from, say, Ubuntu and have it work on the N900?  I understand that I'll probably have to recompile it, but do I need to modify the source code to get it to work?</p><p>The reason I ask is, of course, because applications are key to a computer like the N900 or the iPhone surviving and thriving; even Apple says "There's an App for that."  If the N900 can take advantage of the multitude of FOSS already out there for Linux, that would slingshot its power out beyond anything the iPhone can provide.</p><p>On a semi-related topic: Is the N900 shipping yet?  I keep hearing stories about how it will be Real Soon Now.  I ordered mine on Amazon for the reduced price of $582, but it's now on sale for $550 or so.  Should I cancel my $582 order and re-preorder it at $550?  I even hear rumours of a $50 rebate on top of the $550, making the effective price $500 or so.  Anyone able to comment on this?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The N900 is about to be launched .
Come on over to http : //www.maemo.org/ [ maemo.org ] You will be welcome , and no one will tell you what you can , or can not do.I 'm interested in knowing more about this .
Do N900 applications need to be ported or can we just grab stuff from , say , Ubuntu and have it work on the N900 ?
I understand that I 'll probably have to recompile it , but do I need to modify the source code to get it to work ? The reason I ask is , of course , because applications are key to a computer like the N900 or the iPhone surviving and thriving ; even Apple says " There 's an App for that .
" If the N900 can take advantage of the multitude of FOSS already out there for Linux , that would slingshot its power out beyond anything the iPhone can provide.On a semi-related topic : Is the N900 shipping yet ?
I keep hearing stories about how it will be Real Soon Now .
I ordered mine on Amazon for the reduced price of $ 582 , but it 's now on sale for $ 550 or so .
Should I cancel my $ 582 order and re-preorder it at $ 550 ?
I even hear rumours of a $ 50 rebate on top of the $ 550 , making the effective price $ 500 or so .
Anyone able to comment on this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The N900 is about to be launched.
Come on over to http://www.maemo.org/ [maemo.org]You will be welcome, and no one will tell you what you can, or cannot do.I'm interested in knowing more about this.
Do N900 applications need to be ported or can we just grab stuff from, say, Ubuntu and have it work on the N900?
I understand that I'll probably have to recompile it, but do I need to modify the source code to get it to work?The reason I ask is, of course, because applications are key to a computer like the N900 or the iPhone surviving and thriving; even Apple says "There's an App for that.
"  If the N900 can take advantage of the multitude of FOSS already out there for Linux, that would slingshot its power out beyond anything the iPhone can provide.On a semi-related topic: Is the N900 shipping yet?
I keep hearing stories about how it will be Real Soon Now.
I ordered mine on Amazon for the reduced price of $582, but it's now on sale for $550 or so.
Should I cancel my $582 order and re-preorder it at $550?
I even hear rumours of a $50 rebate on top of the $550, making the effective price $500 or so.
Anyone able to comment on this?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120</id>
	<title>Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>jcr</author>
	<datestamp>1258654800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Over 100,000 apps on the store, and a handful of anecdotes of people deciding to leave the market.  Somehow, I'm not particularly concerned.</p><p>-jcr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Over 100,000 apps on the store , and a handful of anecdotes of people deciding to leave the market .
Somehow , I 'm not particularly concerned.-jcr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over 100,000 apps on the store, and a handful of anecdotes of people deciding to leave the market.
Somehow, I'm not particularly concerned.-jcr</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161314</id>
	<title>The smuggler gets caught eventually</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1258661760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>FTFA, Rogue Amoeba's issue was with a rejection to an update to their existing application, though the rejection itself had nothing to do with the proposed change.</i></p><p>That is correct.</p><p><i>Instead, Apple decided that features in its existing, approved version are now a problem.</i></p><p>That is not correct.</p><p>Or rather, it's almost correct but misphrased.  The features in the existing application WERE a problem - just not one Apple managed to catch the last time Apple reviewed the product.</p><p>Use of Apple trademarked images were always disallowed, I've known that since shortly after the SDK launch.  Now the RA case is interesting because they assumed because the images came from an OS X API they were safe to use in the application - and in fact if you read the case carefully, even some APP REVIEWERS thought they were OK to use for that reason.  But after extensive checking on their part, it was decided they were not.</p><p>Now I can see why RA is arguing the way they were, but think of it this way - why did RA assume they had the right to re-distribute any images from the OS X platform?  That is not explicitly allowed in the API.  Would they also assume they were safe if they were exporting those images and publishing them on the web?  They are obviously meant to be used by applications on the platform but re-distribution is a lot grayer area and I'm not sure I would have assumed it was OK to send and use them elsewhere on other platforms.</p><p><i>Apple's problem is that they have put a guard on the gate to enter their walled garden, except there are thousands of gates each with their own, different guard</i></p><p>That is exactly right.  The problem is each of those guards is different, but it's not like they are not operating from a master list.  It's just that they may not get quite everything on the list, the whole time.  So that is why as a developer it makes sense to be careful about following the rules, because you might sneak something past a few guards but eventually you will probably be caught.</p><p>An even better aspect of the analogy is that the nobility (read: large companies) are able to sneak a lot of stuff past the guards, seemingly with tact approval - like LucasArts blatantly having an image of the iPhone in the instruction screen for Trench Run.  If Apple really wanted to stop the amount of bitching, they would stop making seemingly special allowances for large companies or else explain clear why they were allowed an exception (like if LucasArts had actually licensed that iPhone image [which I doubt is the case]).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA , Rogue Amoeba 's issue was with a rejection to an update to their existing application , though the rejection itself had nothing to do with the proposed change.That is correct.Instead , Apple decided that features in its existing , approved version are now a problem.That is not correct.Or rather , it 's almost correct but misphrased .
The features in the existing application WERE a problem - just not one Apple managed to catch the last time Apple reviewed the product.Use of Apple trademarked images were always disallowed , I 've known that since shortly after the SDK launch .
Now the RA case is interesting because they assumed because the images came from an OS X API they were safe to use in the application - and in fact if you read the case carefully , even some APP REVIEWERS thought they were OK to use for that reason .
But after extensive checking on their part , it was decided they were not.Now I can see why RA is arguing the way they were , but think of it this way - why did RA assume they had the right to re-distribute any images from the OS X platform ?
That is not explicitly allowed in the API .
Would they also assume they were safe if they were exporting those images and publishing them on the web ?
They are obviously meant to be used by applications on the platform but re-distribution is a lot grayer area and I 'm not sure I would have assumed it was OK to send and use them elsewhere on other platforms.Apple 's problem is that they have put a guard on the gate to enter their walled garden , except there are thousands of gates each with their own , different guardThat is exactly right .
The problem is each of those guards is different , but it 's not like they are not operating from a master list .
It 's just that they may not get quite everything on the list , the whole time .
So that is why as a developer it makes sense to be careful about following the rules , because you might sneak something past a few guards but eventually you will probably be caught.An even better aspect of the analogy is that the nobility ( read : large companies ) are able to sneak a lot of stuff past the guards , seemingly with tact approval - like LucasArts blatantly having an image of the iPhone in the instruction screen for Trench Run .
If Apple really wanted to stop the amount of bitching , they would stop making seemingly special allowances for large companies or else explain clear why they were allowed an exception ( like if LucasArts had actually licensed that iPhone image [ which I doubt is the case ] ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA, Rogue Amoeba's issue was with a rejection to an update to their existing application, though the rejection itself had nothing to do with the proposed change.That is correct.Instead, Apple decided that features in its existing, approved version are now a problem.That is not correct.Or rather, it's almost correct but misphrased.
The features in the existing application WERE a problem - just not one Apple managed to catch the last time Apple reviewed the product.Use of Apple trademarked images were always disallowed, I've known that since shortly after the SDK launch.
Now the RA case is interesting because they assumed because the images came from an OS X API they were safe to use in the application - and in fact if you read the case carefully, even some APP REVIEWERS thought they were OK to use for that reason.
But after extensive checking on their part, it was decided they were not.Now I can see why RA is arguing the way they were, but think of it this way - why did RA assume they had the right to re-distribute any images from the OS X platform?
That is not explicitly allowed in the API.
Would they also assume they were safe if they were exporting those images and publishing them on the web?
They are obviously meant to be used by applications on the platform but re-distribution is a lot grayer area and I'm not sure I would have assumed it was OK to send and use them elsewhere on other platforms.Apple's problem is that they have put a guard on the gate to enter their walled garden, except there are thousands of gates each with their own, different guardThat is exactly right.
The problem is each of those guards is different, but it's not like they are not operating from a master list.
It's just that they may not get quite everything on the list, the whole time.
So that is why as a developer it makes sense to be careful about following the rules, because you might sneak something past a few guards but eventually you will probably be caught.An even better aspect of the analogy is that the nobility (read: large companies) are able to sneak a lot of stuff past the guards, seemingly with tact approval - like LucasArts blatantly having an image of the iPhone in the instruction screen for Trench Run.
If Apple really wanted to stop the amount of bitching, they would stop making seemingly special allowances for large companies or else explain clear why they were allowed an exception (like if LucasArts had actually licensed that iPhone image [which I doubt is the case]).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159282</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Hewitt abandoned developers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258655280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How dare he not spend time working on a platform for free! He should be forced to put time into making a library that I can use to make money!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How dare he not spend time working on a platform for free !
He should be forced to put time into making a library that I can use to make money !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How dare he not spend time working on a platform for free!
He should be forced to put time into making a library that I can use to make money!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161798</id>
	<title>Re:I want to join in!</title>
	<author>SilentTristero</author>
	<datestamp>1258663200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interestingly, when <a href="http://www.cyanogenmod.com/" title="cyanogenmod.com">Cyanogen</a> [cyanogenmod.com] (homebrew Android ROM maker) was C&amp;D'ed by Google, someone wrote an app to support him (simple voting/contrib app).  Of course since there's no approval process needed, it shot to the top of the popularity charts in no time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interestingly , when Cyanogen [ cyanogenmod.com ] ( homebrew Android ROM maker ) was C&amp;D'ed by Google , someone wrote an app to support him ( simple voting/contrib app ) .
Of course since there 's no approval process needed , it shot to the top of the popularity charts in no time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interestingly, when Cyanogen [cyanogenmod.com] (homebrew Android ROM maker) was C&amp;D'ed by Google, someone wrote an app to support him (simple voting/contrib app).
Of course since there's no approval process needed, it shot to the top of the popularity charts in no time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166430</id>
	<title>Facebook's Joe Hewitt</title>
	<author>jpm242</author>
	<datestamp>1258636680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm quite sure he wasn't complaining when FB got an update approved in less than 48 hours.</p><p>pff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm quite sure he was n't complaining when FB got an update approved in less than 48 hours.pff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm quite sure he wasn't complaining when FB got an update approved in less than 48 hours.pff.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159744</id>
	<title>Re:100k apps?</title>
	<author>manekineko2</author>
	<datestamp>1258656780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also from what I understand somewhat inflated by ridiculous "apps", for example apps that are in fact just a single book built into a single purpose reader, or better yet, select chapters of a book split into multiple apps so you hook a reader on the cheap and then keep on selling to them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also from what I understand somewhat inflated by ridiculous " apps " , for example apps that are in fact just a single book built into a single purpose reader , or better yet , select chapters of a book split into multiple apps so you hook a reader on the cheap and then keep on selling to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also from what I understand somewhat inflated by ridiculous "apps", for example apps that are in fact just a single book built into a single purpose reader, or better yet, select chapters of a book split into multiple apps so you hook a reader on the cheap and then keep on selling to them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160010</id>
	<title>Re:100k apps?</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1258657440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Are these truly unique apps or are most trivial differences (app#1 main icon is blue, app#2 main icon is red...)</i>
<br>
<br>
Ahh, so you're familiar with the Ubuntu repositories.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are these truly unique apps or are most trivial differences ( app # 1 main icon is blue , app # 2 main icon is red... ) Ahh , so you 're familiar with the Ubuntu repositories .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are these truly unique apps or are most trivial differences (app#1 main icon is blue, app#2 main icon is red...)


Ahh, so you're familiar with the Ubuntu repositories.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161026</id>
	<title>Apple enforcement not unpredictable, allowance is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258660620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The way I see it, the problem is not with Apple enforcing its unknown API restriction. The problem is with Apple *selectively* enforcing that particular restriction and many others.</i></p><p>The thing is, that is almost true but not quite.</p><p>I would slightly rephrase the problem is not selective enforcement but selective allowment (you are now free to use that as a word since I made it up for you).</p><p>The reason I would phrase it that way, is that there is no-way Apple can realistically wall a developer off from every private API.  So they detect what they can, and warn you not to use them.  Lots of people get away with slight infractions for a while but in the end, they were not supposed to be doing that and everyone knows it.</p><p>The "allowment" part comes in when some apps are obviously "allowed" to bypass the rules.  The biggest example of this is the recent "Trench Run" Star Wars game that uses a huge iPhone graphic on the instruction page, clearly disallowed and something many other apps have been rejected for.  While I personally find that a bit maddening, it's not something you cannot work with simply by keeping your own nose clean and shaking your head when you see examples like that - or writing something so compelling Apple "allows" you to bend the rules, too.</p><p><i>For example, the RedLaser app which is one of the top selling apps in the app store uses an undocumented API, specifically, UIGetScreenImage().</i></p><p>That's not a good example because some apps slipped through but all of them are being denied now.  I am using that in one project and they had to issue an emergency update that does not use that call so that applications could ship updates.  The good news there is that since a number of people were using that framework they have a compelling case for Apple to offer some kind of API to make that possible, so I think it will happen sooner rather than later.</p><p><i>Many of the original camera tweaking apps also skirted the API.</i></p><p>Also not a good case because they didn't really skirt the API, they simply altered the view composition.  Again though that was actually helpful because it pushed Apple to provide an API to assist with that by stripping out all the view elements and letting you add your own.</p><p><i>The problem with Apple's approval process has never been about the restrictions, the problem has always been with Apple's unpredictable, arbitrary and selective application of those restrictions.</i></p><p>But again Apple has only been really unpredictable with what they have allowed - not with what they have denied (there are a few app exceptions but they mostly got approved eventually).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The way I see it , the problem is not with Apple enforcing its unknown API restriction .
The problem is with Apple * selectively * enforcing that particular restriction and many others.The thing is , that is almost true but not quite.I would slightly rephrase the problem is not selective enforcement but selective allowment ( you are now free to use that as a word since I made it up for you ) .The reason I would phrase it that way , is that there is no-way Apple can realistically wall a developer off from every private API .
So they detect what they can , and warn you not to use them .
Lots of people get away with slight infractions for a while but in the end , they were not supposed to be doing that and everyone knows it.The " allowment " part comes in when some apps are obviously " allowed " to bypass the rules .
The biggest example of this is the recent " Trench Run " Star Wars game that uses a huge iPhone graphic on the instruction page , clearly disallowed and something many other apps have been rejected for .
While I personally find that a bit maddening , it 's not something you can not work with simply by keeping your own nose clean and shaking your head when you see examples like that - or writing something so compelling Apple " allows " you to bend the rules , too.For example , the RedLaser app which is one of the top selling apps in the app store uses an undocumented API , specifically , UIGetScreenImage ( ) .That 's not a good example because some apps slipped through but all of them are being denied now .
I am using that in one project and they had to issue an emergency update that does not use that call so that applications could ship updates .
The good news there is that since a number of people were using that framework they have a compelling case for Apple to offer some kind of API to make that possible , so I think it will happen sooner rather than later.Many of the original camera tweaking apps also skirted the API.Also not a good case because they did n't really skirt the API , they simply altered the view composition .
Again though that was actually helpful because it pushed Apple to provide an API to assist with that by stripping out all the view elements and letting you add your own.The problem with Apple 's approval process has never been about the restrictions , the problem has always been with Apple 's unpredictable , arbitrary and selective application of those restrictions.But again Apple has only been really unpredictable with what they have allowed - not with what they have denied ( there are a few app exceptions but they mostly got approved eventually ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way I see it, the problem is not with Apple enforcing its unknown API restriction.
The problem is with Apple *selectively* enforcing that particular restriction and many others.The thing is, that is almost true but not quite.I would slightly rephrase the problem is not selective enforcement but selective allowment (you are now free to use that as a word since I made it up for you).The reason I would phrase it that way, is that there is no-way Apple can realistically wall a developer off from every private API.
So they detect what they can, and warn you not to use them.
Lots of people get away with slight infractions for a while but in the end, they were not supposed to be doing that and everyone knows it.The "allowment" part comes in when some apps are obviously "allowed" to bypass the rules.
The biggest example of this is the recent "Trench Run" Star Wars game that uses a huge iPhone graphic on the instruction page, clearly disallowed and something many other apps have been rejected for.
While I personally find that a bit maddening, it's not something you cannot work with simply by keeping your own nose clean and shaking your head when you see examples like that - or writing something so compelling Apple "allows" you to bend the rules, too.For example, the RedLaser app which is one of the top selling apps in the app store uses an undocumented API, specifically, UIGetScreenImage().That's not a good example because some apps slipped through but all of them are being denied now.
I am using that in one project and they had to issue an emergency update that does not use that call so that applications could ship updates.
The good news there is that since a number of people were using that framework they have a compelling case for Apple to offer some kind of API to make that possible, so I think it will happen sooner rather than later.Many of the original camera tweaking apps also skirted the API.Also not a good case because they didn't really skirt the API, they simply altered the view composition.
Again though that was actually helpful because it pushed Apple to provide an API to assist with that by stripping out all the view elements and letting you add your own.The problem with Apple's approval process has never been about the restrictions, the problem has always been with Apple's unpredictable, arbitrary and selective application of those restrictions.But again Apple has only been really unpredictable with what they have allowed - not with what they have denied (there are a few app exceptions but they mostly got approved eventually).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159300</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>Clever7Devil</author>
	<datestamp>1258655340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's two sides to that coin. Software with high production costs do need to be extremely popular to make porting to apple OSs worthwhile; however, products with low production costs benefit by being as widely available as possible without the worry of massive overhead. Furthermore, simple programs are more likely to be accepted as they pose less threat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's two sides to that coin .
Software with high production costs do need to be extremely popular to make porting to apple OSs worthwhile ; however , products with low production costs benefit by being as widely available as possible without the worry of massive overhead .
Furthermore , simple programs are more likely to be accepted as they pose less threat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's two sides to that coin.
Software with high production costs do need to be extremely popular to make porting to apple OSs worthwhile; however, products with low production costs benefit by being as widely available as possible without the worry of massive overhead.
Furthermore, simple programs are more likely to be accepted as they pose less threat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161424</id>
	<title>exact same thing Apple did with the Macntosh</title>
	<author>Dan667</author>
	<datestamp>1258662060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They never learn, you cannot control all the software and lock everyone out to try and make every last cent on it and expect to stay on top.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They never learn , you can not control all the software and lock everyone out to try and make every last cent on it and expect to stay on top .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They never learn, you cannot control all the software and lock everyone out to try and make every last cent on it and expect to stay on top.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159754</id>
	<title>Re:Cry wolf</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...Joe Hewitt,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Justin Williams, and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Rogue Amoeba. I count three.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...Joe Hewitt , ... Justin Williams , and ... Rogue Amoeba .
I count three .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Joe Hewitt, ... Justin Williams, and ... Rogue Amoeba.
I count three.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166478</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1258636920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Therefore, I conclude that this will not increase the quality of programs on the iPhone. It will decrease the diversity, while increasing the diversity and quality on other phones. But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did: When you are at the top, the only direction to go is down.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Sturgeons law still applies,<br> <br>

90\% of everything is crap, therefore 90\% of those fleeing are crap and only 10\% of the remaining apps are decent/useful. This does mean that there is a smaller volume of useful apps, but also a smaller volume of crap.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Therefore , I conclude that this will not increase the quality of programs on the iPhone .
It will decrease the diversity , while increasing the diversity and quality on other phones .
But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did : When you are at the top , the only direction to go is down .
Sturgeons law still applies , 90 \ % of everything is crap , therefore 90 \ % of those fleeing are crap and only 10 \ % of the remaining apps are decent/useful .
This does mean that there is a smaller volume of useful apps , but also a smaller volume of crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Therefore, I conclude that this will not increase the quality of programs on the iPhone.
It will decrease the diversity, while increasing the diversity and quality on other phones.
But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did: When you are at the top, the only direction to go is down.
Sturgeons law still applies, 

90\% of everything is crap, therefore 90\% of those fleeing are crap and only 10\% of the remaining apps are decent/useful.
This does mean that there is a smaller volume of useful apps, but also a smaller volume of crap.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159310</id>
	<title>Re:Dear fleeing developers.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258655400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and no one will tell you what you can, or cannot do.</p></div><p>Except, of course, <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/12/technology/hempel\_nokia.fortune/" title="cnn.com">sell any software to Americans</a> [cnn.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and no one will tell you what you can , or can not do.Except , of course , sell any software to Americans [ cnn.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and no one will tell you what you can, or cannot do.Except, of course, sell any software to Americans [cnn.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070</id>
	<title>Dear fleeing developers.</title>
	<author>kurt555gs</author>
	<datestamp>1258654620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The N900 is about to be launched. Come on over to <a href="http://www.maemo.org/" title="maemo.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.maemo.org/</a> [maemo.org]</p><p>You will be welcome, and no one will tell you what you can, or cannot do.</p><p>Cheers!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The N900 is about to be launched .
Come on over to http : //www.maemo.org/ [ maemo.org ] You will be welcome , and no one will tell you what you can , or can not do.Cheers !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The N900 is about to be launched.
Come on over to http://www.maemo.org/ [maemo.org]You will be welcome, and no one will tell you what you can, or cannot do.Cheers!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162526</id>
	<title>Re:Approval vs Sales</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258622520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why should apple be responsible for your lack of skill to protect yourself from privacy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should apple be responsible for your lack of skill to protect yourself from privacy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should apple be responsible for your lack of skill to protect yourself from privacy?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30169950</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258724280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There may be 100,000 apps, but 95\% of those are useless crap and of the remaining 5\%, 80\% of THOSE tend to duplicate each other's functionality.  Whether Android or any other phone can compete in sheer numbers isn't really relevant so long as it covers the main types of apps people want.</p></div><p>Gee, when Mac users make the same argument about Windows apps, they get laughed at.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There may be 100,000 apps , but 95 \ % of those are useless crap and of the remaining 5 \ % , 80 \ % of THOSE tend to duplicate each other 's functionality .
Whether Android or any other phone can compete in sheer numbers is n't really relevant so long as it covers the main types of apps people want.Gee , when Mac users make the same argument about Windows apps , they get laughed at .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There may be 100,000 apps, but 95\% of those are useless crap and of the remaining 5\%, 80\% of THOSE tend to duplicate each other's functionality.
Whether Android or any other phone can compete in sheer numbers isn't really relevant so long as it covers the main types of apps people want.Gee, when Mac users make the same argument about Windows apps, they get laughed at.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30193632</id>
	<title>Re:Approval vs Sales</title>
	<author>cybernanga</author>
	<datestamp>1258907400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>* Piracy is rampant, and Apple is not doing anything to resolve the issue. Google search results for our app was showing 4-5 hits on the first page of pirate sites providing cracked versions of our app. I've never seen piracy so prevalent and mainstream as it is for iPhone. Back in the Pocket PC days we had to search very thoroughly to find pirated versions of our apps - usually in the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ru TLDs. Now they are front and center.</p></div><p>I've noticed that if you search for something on Google, and include the word "torrent" in your search query, you will get many results, no matter what you search for.
</p><p>
The results are fake and do not actually have a torrent of what you searched for.
</p><p>
Have you actually checked that the results you are getting from Google, actually lead to pirate versions of your software?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>* Piracy is rampant , and Apple is not doing anything to resolve the issue .
Google search results for our app was showing 4-5 hits on the first page of pirate sites providing cracked versions of our app .
I 've never seen piracy so prevalent and mainstream as it is for iPhone .
Back in the Pocket PC days we had to search very thoroughly to find pirated versions of our apps - usually in the .ru TLDs .
Now they are front and center.I 've noticed that if you search for something on Google , and include the word " torrent " in your search query , you will get many results , no matter what you search for .
The results are fake and do not actually have a torrent of what you searched for .
Have you actually checked that the results you are getting from Google , actually lead to pirate versions of your software ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>* Piracy is rampant, and Apple is not doing anything to resolve the issue.
Google search results for our app was showing 4-5 hits on the first page of pirate sites providing cracked versions of our app.
I've never seen piracy so prevalent and mainstream as it is for iPhone.
Back in the Pocket PC days we had to search very thoroughly to find pirated versions of our apps - usually in the .ru TLDs.
Now they are front and center.I've noticed that if you search for something on Google, and include the word "torrent" in your search query, you will get many results, no matter what you search for.
The results are fake and do not actually have a torrent of what you searched for.
Have you actually checked that the results you are getting from Google, actually lead to pirate versions of your software?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159788</id>
	<title>Re:So the flee ...</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1258656900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(This is still capitalism, isn't it?)</p></div><p>I think the problem is that it's capitalism in a semi-benevolent dictatorship</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( This is still capitalism , is n't it ?
) I think the problem is that it 's capitalism in a semi-benevolent dictatorship</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(This is still capitalism, isn't it?
)I think the problem is that it's capitalism in a semi-benevolent dictatorship
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161996</id>
	<title>Re:Approval vs Sales</title>
	<author>WiiVault</author>
	<datestamp>1258663860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>No offense the app looks fun, but perhaps you are expecting too much out of a 3.5 star app that weighs in at 9 megs. With only 80 or so ratings on the US store for the paid version its kind of hard to assume this game was charting for very long. The thing about having to hit $250 to get payed per sountry is insane though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No offense the app looks fun , but perhaps you are expecting too much out of a 3.5 star app that weighs in at 9 megs .
With only 80 or so ratings on the US store for the paid version its kind of hard to assume this game was charting for very long .
The thing about having to hit $ 250 to get payed per sountry is insane though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No offense the app looks fun, but perhaps you are expecting too much out of a 3.5 star app that weighs in at 9 megs.
With only 80 or so ratings on the US store for the paid version its kind of hard to assume this game was charting for very long.
The thing about having to hit $250 to get payed per sountry is insane though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163392</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258625160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did: When you are at the top, the only direction to go is down.</p><p>I'm sure someone said the same thing back in early 2006 when "all" they had out was the widely successful iPod line (including the Nano which had only just arrived) and iTunes was already a market force.  Of course, that was also around the time when they had just started launching Intel Macs, and the iPhone was not on most people's radars.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did : When you are at the top , the only direction to go is down.I 'm sure someone said the same thing back in early 2006 when " all " they had out was the widely successful iPod line ( including the Nano which had only just arrived ) and iTunes was already a market force .
Of course , that was also around the time when they had just started launching Intel Macs , and the iPhone was not on most people 's radars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did: When you are at the top, the only direction to go is down.I'm sure someone said the same thing back in early 2006 when "all" they had out was the widely successful iPod line (including the Nano which had only just arrived) and iTunes was already a market force.
Of course, that was also around the time when they had just started launching Intel Macs, and the iPhone was not on most people's radars.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159850</id>
	<title>Re:100k apps?</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1258657080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sure, there are 100,000 apps, but to be fair, 90,000 of those apps are designed solely to compete for the "best farting noise" market...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , there are 100,000 apps , but to be fair , 90,000 of those apps are designed solely to compete for the " best farting noise " market.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, there are 100,000 apps, but to be fair, 90,000 of those apps are designed solely to compete for the "best farting noise" market...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162202</id>
	<title>True, but moreso for games</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1258621440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Overall I thought your comment was very well thought out and a good insight into what is happening now - I would say however that the sales issues hit the game category a lot harder than other areas, since there is so much action there compared to a relatively more calm set of productivity applications.</p><p>We are at a transition point in the iPhone market now where simply existing on Apple's list is not enough, and you have to market in other ways to get decent levels of sales.  I really subscribe to the "two app store" idea, where the App Store is really two separate app stores - free or low priced apps, and second shadow app store of much higher quality and more complex applications.  That I still see as being a major growth area, but it requires more work and a lot more promotion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Overall I thought your comment was very well thought out and a good insight into what is happening now - I would say however that the sales issues hit the game category a lot harder than other areas , since there is so much action there compared to a relatively more calm set of productivity applications.We are at a transition point in the iPhone market now where simply existing on Apple 's list is not enough , and you have to market in other ways to get decent levels of sales .
I really subscribe to the " two app store " idea , where the App Store is really two separate app stores - free or low priced apps , and second shadow app store of much higher quality and more complex applications .
That I still see as being a major growth area , but it requires more work and a lot more promotion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Overall I thought your comment was very well thought out and a good insight into what is happening now - I would say however that the sales issues hit the game category a lot harder than other areas, since there is so much action there compared to a relatively more calm set of productivity applications.We are at a transition point in the iPhone market now where simply existing on Apple's list is not enough, and you have to market in other ways to get decent levels of sales.
I really subscribe to the "two app store" idea, where the App Store is really two separate app stores - free or low priced apps, and second shadow app store of much higher quality and more complex applications.
That I still see as being a major growth area, but it requires more work and a lot more promotion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204</id>
	<title>So the flee ...</title>
	<author>ackthpt</author>
	<datestamp>1258655040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So they flee.</p><p>Where there's money others will step in.</p><p>(This is still capitalism, isn't it?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So they flee.Where there 's money others will step in .
( This is still capitalism , is n't it ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they flee.Where there's money others will step in.
(This is still capitalism, isn't it?
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160366</id>
	<title>Flexibility would be prefered.</title>
	<author>Rexdude</author>
	<datestamp>1258658580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you buy any other gadget, be it a PC/laptop/other mobile phone/gaming console, the manufacturer's warranty simply defines the operating conditions for the product, and how you will<br>void warranty if you use it in any other way. For eg, if you spill coffee on your laptop keyboard, you'll have to pay for the repairs as it wouldn't be covered under warranty. If you overclock your CPU/GPU, you cannot complain if it gets fried.<br>Understandably, Apple caters only to the technologically challenged and those who don't mind paying and then paying some more for a smooth experience.<br>If you're a hacker type, your only option is to jailbreak it (or not use it at all).<br>It would be better if they were a bit more flexible- officially continue with the app store, but also allow 3rd party apps with the disclaimer that you're on your own if your phone gets bricked by installing other stuff. At least it allows tinkering for those who want to.<br>Then again, this is Apple we're talking about.</p><p>Quick question- what smartphones did the average Joe in the US use before the iPhone? Never mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you buy any other gadget , be it a PC/laptop/other mobile phone/gaming console , the manufacturer 's warranty simply defines the operating conditions for the product , and how you willvoid warranty if you use it in any other way .
For eg , if you spill coffee on your laptop keyboard , you 'll have to pay for the repairs as it would n't be covered under warranty .
If you overclock your CPU/GPU , you can not complain if it gets fried.Understandably , Apple caters only to the technologically challenged and those who do n't mind paying and then paying some more for a smooth experience.If you 're a hacker type , your only option is to jailbreak it ( or not use it at all ) .It would be better if they were a bit more flexible- officially continue with the app store , but also allow 3rd party apps with the disclaimer that you 're on your own if your phone gets bricked by installing other stuff .
At least it allows tinkering for those who want to.Then again , this is Apple we 're talking about.Quick question- what smartphones did the average Joe in the US use before the iPhone ?
Never mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you buy any other gadget, be it a PC/laptop/other mobile phone/gaming console, the manufacturer's warranty simply defines the operating conditions for the product, and how you willvoid warranty if you use it in any other way.
For eg, if you spill coffee on your laptop keyboard, you'll have to pay for the repairs as it wouldn't be covered under warranty.
If you overclock your CPU/GPU, you cannot complain if it gets fried.Understandably, Apple caters only to the technologically challenged and those who don't mind paying and then paying some more for a smooth experience.If you're a hacker type, your only option is to jailbreak it (or not use it at all).It would be better if they were a bit more flexible- officially continue with the app store, but also allow 3rd party apps with the disclaimer that you're on your own if your phone gets bricked by installing other stuff.
At least it allows tinkering for those who want to.Then again, this is Apple we're talking about.Quick question- what smartphones did the average Joe in the US use before the iPhone?
Never mind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159736</id>
	<title>Re:That's not the biggest problem...</title>
	<author>swb</author>
	<datestamp>1258656780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would suck, but Microsoft could have only done that if it had released hardware *and* an operating system that was as far ahead of the competition as the iPhone was from its competition.  Apple had the advantage of a really high quality device and OS; when you make something good you get to make a lot of rules.</p><p>Apple will change their tune when the rest of the smartphone world catches up to them.   Android will gain a lot of traction due to the Droid/Verizon combination; I think there are a lot of business customers dying for an iPhone who can only use Verizon and if they get Droids it will boost the usage considerably.</p><p>And some of it may depend on Apple's ability to "sell" these restrictions as features; if Android ends up with a ton of rogue apps targeting it, people may flee for a redistricted phone out of fear.  It's not like Apple doesn't aggressively market itself as free from the virus problems of PCs already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would suck , but Microsoft could have only done that if it had released hardware * and * an operating system that was as far ahead of the competition as the iPhone was from its competition .
Apple had the advantage of a really high quality device and OS ; when you make something good you get to make a lot of rules.Apple will change their tune when the rest of the smartphone world catches up to them .
Android will gain a lot of traction due to the Droid/Verizon combination ; I think there are a lot of business customers dying for an iPhone who can only use Verizon and if they get Droids it will boost the usage considerably.And some of it may depend on Apple 's ability to " sell " these restrictions as features ; if Android ends up with a ton of rogue apps targeting it , people may flee for a redistricted phone out of fear .
It 's not like Apple does n't aggressively market itself as free from the virus problems of PCs already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would suck, but Microsoft could have only done that if it had released hardware *and* an operating system that was as far ahead of the competition as the iPhone was from its competition.
Apple had the advantage of a really high quality device and OS; when you make something good you get to make a lot of rules.Apple will change their tune when the rest of the smartphone world catches up to them.
Android will gain a lot of traction due to the Droid/Verizon combination; I think there are a lot of business customers dying for an iPhone who can only use Verizon and if they get Droids it will boost the usage considerably.And some of it may depend on Apple's ability to "sell" these restrictions as features; if Android ends up with a ton of rogue apps targeting it, people may flee for a redistricted phone out of fear.
It's not like Apple doesn't aggressively market itself as free from the virus problems of PCs already.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158916</id>
	<title>Result in lower quality software??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait, I thought it already had lower quality software...<br> <br>
"Respected Developers" don't use the App Store or code on the iPhone anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , I thought it already had lower quality software.. . " Respected Developers " do n't use the App Store or code on the iPhone anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, I thought it already had lower quality software... 
"Respected Developers" don't use the App Store or code on the iPhone anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159884</id>
	<title>Re:Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258657140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Absolutely Fitz, choosing technology based on press snipes is brilliant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely Fitz , choosing technology based on press snipes is brilliant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely Fitz, choosing technology based on press snipes is brilliant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159960</id>
	<title>Re:So the flee ...</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1258657320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no money to be made if Apple decides to reject your app.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no money to be made if Apple decides to reject your app .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no money to be made if Apple decides to reject your app.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1258657200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only ones to "stick it out" are the ones who are the most likely to profit.</p></div><p>I disagree.  The unprofitable applications will be unprofitable on other phones too.  The profitable applications will be profitable on other phones too.  The developers who migrate away from the platform are the ones getting rejections from Apple.  These are the most unique, edgy, or innovative applications, or ones that compete with the built-in Apple functionality.</p><p>Therefore, I conclude that this will not increase the quality of programs on the iPhone.  It will decrease the diversity, while increasing the diversity and quality on other phones.  But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did: When you are at the top, the only direction to go is down.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only ones to " stick it out " are the ones who are the most likely to profit.I disagree .
The unprofitable applications will be unprofitable on other phones too .
The profitable applications will be profitable on other phones too .
The developers who migrate away from the platform are the ones getting rejections from Apple .
These are the most unique , edgy , or innovative applications , or ones that compete with the built-in Apple functionality.Therefore , I conclude that this will not increase the quality of programs on the iPhone .
It will decrease the diversity , while increasing the diversity and quality on other phones .
But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did : When you are at the top , the only direction to go is down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only ones to "stick it out" are the ones who are the most likely to profit.I disagree.
The unprofitable applications will be unprofitable on other phones too.
The profitable applications will be profitable on other phones too.
The developers who migrate away from the platform are the ones getting rejections from Apple.
These are the most unique, edgy, or innovative applications, or ones that compete with the built-in Apple functionality.Therefore, I conclude that this will not increase the quality of programs on the iPhone.
It will decrease the diversity, while increasing the diversity and quality on other phones.
But that was going to happen no matter what Apple did: When you are at the top, the only direction to go is down.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30178542</id>
	<title>Stop the whining already...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258716000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The amount of whining going on about Apple's review process is mind boggling.  For all it's perceived problems, the app store is a money generating machine.  If a few developers can't find common ground with Apple in order to make a shed-load of money, then good riddance - less competition for the rest of us.</p><p>The simple reality is that the App Store is a tightly controlled distribution channel, not so different from traditional distribution channels.  You can't just go plopping your products on Walmart's shelves wihtout jumping through dozens of hoops.  Ever try selling content though a wireless carrier?  Why should one expect zero control by Apple when it comes to what is sold though THEIR STORE?   At lest Apple doesn't tell you what the price has to be.</p><p>You can argue that Apples insistence to lock out apps not approved by them is gestapo - even anti-competitive, but having years of experience designing and marketing mobile development platforms for the other fruity cell phone company, I can tell you that what they've done here is nothing short of miraculous.  The paranoia from wireless operators when it comes to applications on phones is legendary.  Just allowing Apple to own the distribution channel and eliminating the need to deal with the operator (or hundreds of operators globally) is a monumental step in the right direction as far as profitability of software vendors is concerned - though I doubt AT&amp;T would admit it... I would bet a good sum of money that the current approval/signature system was put in place to placate the carriers and allow 3rd pary apps *period* just as much as it was put in place to ensure a steady stream of revenue for Apple.   I'll go one step further and say that there would be no carriers selling "open" Andriod phones if it was not for the doors the iPhone has opened - and the competition it has created.</p><p>Why they lock down iPod Touches, or even many of the more benign APIs in the iPhone, however, is a mystery to me.  I can understand the rationale when a cell phone network is involved - but nobody except me is going to care if some app melts my iPod touch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The amount of whining going on about Apple 's review process is mind boggling .
For all it 's perceived problems , the app store is a money generating machine .
If a few developers ca n't find common ground with Apple in order to make a shed-load of money , then good riddance - less competition for the rest of us.The simple reality is that the App Store is a tightly controlled distribution channel , not so different from traditional distribution channels .
You ca n't just go plopping your products on Walmart 's shelves wihtout jumping through dozens of hoops .
Ever try selling content though a wireless carrier ?
Why should one expect zero control by Apple when it comes to what is sold though THEIR STORE ?
At lest Apple does n't tell you what the price has to be.You can argue that Apples insistence to lock out apps not approved by them is gestapo - even anti-competitive , but having years of experience designing and marketing mobile development platforms for the other fruity cell phone company , I can tell you that what they 've done here is nothing short of miraculous .
The paranoia from wireless operators when it comes to applications on phones is legendary .
Just allowing Apple to own the distribution channel and eliminating the need to deal with the operator ( or hundreds of operators globally ) is a monumental step in the right direction as far as profitability of software vendors is concerned - though I doubt AT&amp;T would admit it... I would bet a good sum of money that the current approval/signature system was put in place to placate the carriers and allow 3rd pary apps * period * just as much as it was put in place to ensure a steady stream of revenue for Apple .
I 'll go one step further and say that there would be no carriers selling " open " Andriod phones if it was not for the doors the iPhone has opened - and the competition it has created.Why they lock down iPod Touches , or even many of the more benign APIs in the iPhone , however , is a mystery to me .
I can understand the rationale when a cell phone network is involved - but nobody except me is going to care if some app melts my iPod touch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The amount of whining going on about Apple's review process is mind boggling.
For all it's perceived problems, the app store is a money generating machine.
If a few developers can't find common ground with Apple in order to make a shed-load of money, then good riddance - less competition for the rest of us.The simple reality is that the App Store is a tightly controlled distribution channel, not so different from traditional distribution channels.
You can't just go plopping your products on Walmart's shelves wihtout jumping through dozens of hoops.
Ever try selling content though a wireless carrier?
Why should one expect zero control by Apple when it comes to what is sold though THEIR STORE?
At lest Apple doesn't tell you what the price has to be.You can argue that Apples insistence to lock out apps not approved by them is gestapo - even anti-competitive, but having years of experience designing and marketing mobile development platforms for the other fruity cell phone company, I can tell you that what they've done here is nothing short of miraculous.
The paranoia from wireless operators when it comes to applications on phones is legendary.
Just allowing Apple to own the distribution channel and eliminating the need to deal with the operator (or hundreds of operators globally) is a monumental step in the right direction as far as profitability of software vendors is concerned - though I doubt AT&amp;T would admit it... I would bet a good sum of money that the current approval/signature system was put in place to placate the carriers and allow 3rd pary apps *period* just as much as it was put in place to ensure a steady stream of revenue for Apple.
I'll go one step further and say that there would be no carriers selling "open" Andriod phones if it was not for the doors the iPhone has opened - and the competition it has created.Why they lock down iPod Touches, or even many of the more benign APIs in the iPhone, however, is a mystery to me.
I can understand the rationale when a cell phone network is involved - but nobody except me is going to care if some app melts my iPod touch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159408</id>
	<title>Android Market says hello!</title>
	<author>system1111</author>
	<datestamp>1258655700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>With the Droid pushing momentum behind the demand. It will be interesting to see how Apple's and Android's app markets compare over time. Based on their tactics I don't think this one is going to swing Apples way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>With the Droid pushing momentum behind the demand .
It will be interesting to see how Apple 's and Android 's app markets compare over time .
Based on their tactics I do n't think this one is going to swing Apples way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the Droid pushing momentum behind the demand.
It will be interesting to see how Apple's and Android's app markets compare over time.
Based on their tactics I don't think this one is going to swing Apples way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159316</id>
	<title>App process is annoying. Not impossible.</title>
	<author>BlueBoxSW.com</author>
	<datestamp>1258655400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, you may get rejected for no understandable reason, but you also get accepted without any major modification.</p><p>To clarify, Steve Jobs is not personally approving all apps.</p><p>Some recent college grad with an unknown degree and a checklist is doing this work, which is why it's kind of random.</p><p>The iTunes store has so many advantages, it's worth the hassle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , you may get rejected for no understandable reason , but you also get accepted without any major modification.To clarify , Steve Jobs is not personally approving all apps.Some recent college grad with an unknown degree and a checklist is doing this work , which is why it 's kind of random.The iTunes store has so many advantages , it 's worth the hassle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, you may get rejected for no understandable reason, but you also get accepted without any major modification.To clarify, Steve Jobs is not personally approving all apps.Some recent college grad with an unknown degree and a checklist is doing this work, which is why it's kind of random.The iTunes store has so many advantages, it's worth the hassle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159396</id>
	<title>Re:They are all writing for Windows now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258655640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you bother buying Fusion or Prallels, nothing, but that seems to miss the point.</p><p>Some games, I like Corel Photopaint myself - yes there are alternatives, none seem to have as high a rate of format compatibility, few seem to have ease of use (without losing functionality), and all of those cost more money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you bother buying Fusion or Prallels , nothing , but that seems to miss the point.Some games , I like Corel Photopaint myself - yes there are alternatives , none seem to have as high a rate of format compatibility , few seem to have ease of use ( without losing functionality ) , and all of those cost more money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you bother buying Fusion or Prallels, nothing, but that seems to miss the point.Some games, I like Corel Photopaint myself - yes there are alternatives, none seem to have as high a rate of format compatibility, few seem to have ease of use (without losing functionality), and all of those cost more money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159928</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1258657260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Over 100,000 apps on the store, and a handful of anecdotes of people deciding to leave the market. Somehow, I'm not particularly concerned.</p></div><p>How many apps never made it to the store because of Apple's arbitrary review policy?<br>Of the 100,000 that did, how many of those apps are "popular"?<br>Of those, how many have frustrated devs saying "fuck this noise, I'm out"</p><p>The fact that <b>the developer of <i>the most popular app</i> is frustrated</b> should say a lot.<br>Apple's review process is the Community/Homeowners' Association (HOA) of the software world.<br>And seriously, nobody loves their HOA.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over 100,000 apps on the store , and a handful of anecdotes of people deciding to leave the market .
Somehow , I 'm not particularly concerned.How many apps never made it to the store because of Apple 's arbitrary review policy ? Of the 100,000 that did , how many of those apps are " popular " ? Of those , how many have frustrated devs saying " fuck this noise , I 'm out " The fact that the developer of the most popular app is frustrated should say a lot.Apple 's review process is the Community/Homeowners ' Association ( HOA ) of the software world.And seriously , nobody loves their HOA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over 100,000 apps on the store, and a handful of anecdotes of people deciding to leave the market.
Somehow, I'm not particularly concerned.How many apps never made it to the store because of Apple's arbitrary review policy?Of the 100,000 that did, how many of those apps are "popular"?Of those, how many have frustrated devs saying "fuck this noise, I'm out"The fact that the developer of the most popular app is frustrated should say a lot.Apple's review process is the Community/Homeowners' Association (HOA) of the software world.And seriously, nobody loves their HOA.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30206852</id>
	<title>Re:Dear fleeing developers.</title>
	<author>Rakarra</author>
	<datestamp>1258974600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Uh, no they can't. The base software on the N900 does come an xterminal program. The N900 is "locked down" (I use that term very loosely) to prevent a casual user from inadvertently screwing up their phone.  But for the knowledgeable user, you can gain a root shell on the N900 quite easily. If you have root, well, you own the device.</p></div><p>iPhone users who jailbroke their phones owned their devices too. It just meant that they could no longer apply updates. Then more and more things came out that required those updates to install or work.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , no they ca n't .
The base software on the N900 does come an xterminal program .
The N900 is " locked down " ( I use that term very loosely ) to prevent a casual user from inadvertently screwing up their phone .
But for the knowledgeable user , you can gain a root shell on the N900 quite easily .
If you have root , well , you own the device.iPhone users who jailbroke their phones owned their devices too .
It just meant that they could no longer apply updates .
Then more and more things came out that required those updates to install or work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, no they can't.
The base software on the N900 does come an xterminal program.
The N900 is "locked down" (I use that term very loosely) to prevent a casual user from inadvertently screwing up their phone.
But for the knowledgeable user, you can gain a root shell on the N900 quite easily.
If you have root, well, you own the device.iPhone users who jailbroke their phones owned their devices too.
It just meant that they could no longer apply updates.
Then more and more things came out that required those updates to install or work.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162660</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165286</id>
	<title>not surprised</title>
	<author>pbjones</author>
	<datestamp>1258631580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>iPhone is a consumer trend and not an essential item, you can easily buy another Smartphone. Does anyone remember Hypercard? a million 'stacks' available, about 10 of them were really useful. Apple has limited development on a platform that always had a finite life. They made their money, what do they care?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>iPhone is a consumer trend and not an essential item , you can easily buy another Smartphone .
Does anyone remember Hypercard ?
a million 'stacks ' available , about 10 of them were really useful .
Apple has limited development on a platform that always had a finite life .
They made their money , what do they care ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>iPhone is a consumer trend and not an essential item, you can easily buy another Smartphone.
Does anyone remember Hypercard?
a million 'stacks' available, about 10 of them were really useful.
Apple has limited development on a platform that always had a finite life.
They made their money, what do they care?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30172012</id>
	<title>Re:Obsession</title>
	<author>Me! Me! 42</author>
	<datestamp>1258736880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>(You kids under 35 can skip this since you've never even heard of a pager!)<br>
What is the difference between someone paging you and and the same person calling your iPhone but not leaving a message?<br>
Your pager beeps and displays a phone number.<br>
Your iPhone alerts you and displays a phone number.</htmltext>
<tokenext>( You kids under 35 can skip this since you 've never even heard of a pager !
) What is the difference between someone paging you and and the same person calling your iPhone but not leaving a message ?
Your pager beeps and displays a phone number .
Your iPhone alerts you and displays a phone number .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(You kids under 35 can skip this since you've never even heard of a pager!
)
What is the difference between someone paging you and and the same person calling your iPhone but not leaving a message?
Your pager beeps and displays a phone number.
Your iPhone alerts you and displays a phone number.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160116</id>
	<title>I AM RICH!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258657800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only they would have kept the iamrich game around, none of this would have ever happened<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only they would have kept the iamrich game around , none of this would have ever happened : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only they would have kept the iamrich game around, none of this would have ever happened :(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159508</id>
	<title>Re:100k apps?</title>
	<author>TrancePhreak</author>
	<datestamp>1258656060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some of them aren't even apps. They're content unlockers for other Apps because Apple hasn't had in-app purchase until recent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of them are n't even apps .
They 're content unlockers for other Apps because Apple has n't had in-app purchase until recent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some of them aren't even apps.
They're content unlockers for other Apps because Apple hasn't had in-app purchase until recent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946</id>
	<title>Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene?  Check!</title>
	<author>Impy the Impiuos Imp</author>
	<datestamp>1258654260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; "...continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software."</p><p><b>Dooooooooooom!!!</b></p><p>The only ones to "stick it out" are the ones who are the most likely to profit.  This tends to be apps people mostly want.</p><p>One could argue the less likelihood of profit on an Apple Mac platform is what <b>increases</b> the average quality of programs -- only the "good stuff" gets ported, in addition to a handful of Mac-only apps.</p><p>Keep in mind part of Apple's "problem" with the approval process isn't related to quality at all, but rather strategic thinking on which apps to allow, to discourage competition to its own apps, or the OS as a whole.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; " ...continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software. " Dooooooooooom ! !
! The only ones to " stick it out " are the ones who are the most likely to profit .
This tends to be apps people mostly want.One could argue the less likelihood of profit on an Apple Mac platform is what increases the average quality of programs -- only the " good stuff " gets ported , in addition to a handful of Mac-only apps.Keep in mind part of Apple 's " problem " with the approval process is n't related to quality at all , but rather strategic thinking on which apps to allow , to discourage competition to its own apps , or the OS as a whole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; "...continued migration away from iPhone development will most likely result in lower quality software."Dooooooooooom!!
!The only ones to "stick it out" are the ones who are the most likely to profit.
This tends to be apps people mostly want.One could argue the less likelihood of profit on an Apple Mac platform is what increases the average quality of programs -- only the "good stuff" gets ported, in addition to a handful of Mac-only apps.Keep in mind part of Apple's "problem" with the approval process isn't related to quality at all, but rather strategic thinking on which apps to allow, to discourage competition to its own apps, or the OS as a whole.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161254</id>
	<title>Re:Losing customers as well?</title>
	<author>LynnwoodRooster</author>
	<datestamp>1258661520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If we go by money as an indicator of vision, the Steve Job's is blind compared to Bill Gates...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we go by money as an indicator of vision , the Steve Job 's is blind compared to Bill Gates.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we go by money as an indicator of vision, the Steve Job's is blind compared to Bill Gates...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164708</id>
	<title>Re:That's not the biggest problem...</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1258629120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Windows would have no viruses...</p><p>What gives you that idea?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Windows would have no viruses...What gives you that idea ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Windows would have no viruses...What gives you that idea?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159550</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could you point it out to the rest of us?   Last time I checked, there was no approval process for FB apps, and the FB API requires no NDA.   So I'm having a pretty tough time finding any irony here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could you point it out to the rest of us ?
Last time I checked , there was no approval process for FB apps , and the FB API requires no NDA .
So I 'm having a pretty tough time finding any irony here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could you point it out to the rest of us?
Last time I checked, there was no approval process for FB apps, and the FB API requires no NDA.
So I'm having a pretty tough time finding any irony here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162140</id>
	<title>Not where the money is.</title>
	<author>CodeInspired</author>
	<datestamp>1258664340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>My guess is that most of the developers leaving the iPhone platform are leaving because there is no market for them.  Mainstream consumer applications are a very small percentage of the software written in the world. There are a few companies that have the talent and resources to invest in producing highly polished apps that appeal to a broad range of users.  It takes time, creativity, and marketing dollars to be successfull in that playing field.

For the rest of us, we are most likely writing some internal software app that attempts to solve business problems at the least amount of cost. It doesn't need to be pretty.  Hell, it doesn't even need to work well.  But we all get paid for doing it and, hopefully, what we write is useful to someone.

I know it's not Apple's target market, but I can think of a thousand ways to utilize the iPhone hardware, just none of them would matter to anyone outside my company.  I guess my point is,  until the iPhone platform is opened up to where it can be used to solve custom business issues, iPhone development will be little more than a side hobby for most developers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My guess is that most of the developers leaving the iPhone platform are leaving because there is no market for them .
Mainstream consumer applications are a very small percentage of the software written in the world .
There are a few companies that have the talent and resources to invest in producing highly polished apps that appeal to a broad range of users .
It takes time , creativity , and marketing dollars to be successfull in that playing field .
For the rest of us , we are most likely writing some internal software app that attempts to solve business problems at the least amount of cost .
It does n't need to be pretty .
Hell , it does n't even need to work well .
But we all get paid for doing it and , hopefully , what we write is useful to someone .
I know it 's not Apple 's target market , but I can think of a thousand ways to utilize the iPhone hardware , just none of them would matter to anyone outside my company .
I guess my point is , until the iPhone platform is opened up to where it can be used to solve custom business issues , iPhone development will be little more than a side hobby for most developers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My guess is that most of the developers leaving the iPhone platform are leaving because there is no market for them.
Mainstream consumer applications are a very small percentage of the software written in the world.
There are a few companies that have the talent and resources to invest in producing highly polished apps that appeal to a broad range of users.
It takes time, creativity, and marketing dollars to be successfull in that playing field.
For the rest of us, we are most likely writing some internal software app that attempts to solve business problems at the least amount of cost.
It doesn't need to be pretty.
Hell, it doesn't even need to work well.
But we all get paid for doing it and, hopefully, what we write is useful to someone.
I know it's not Apple's target market, but I can think of a thousand ways to utilize the iPhone hardware, just none of them would matter to anyone outside my company.
I guess my point is,  until the iPhone platform is opened up to where it can be used to solve custom business issues, iPhone development will be little more than a side hobby for most developers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163200</id>
	<title>Re:Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene? Chec</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258624680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only ones to "stick it out" are the ones who are the most likely to profit. This tends to be apps people mostly want.</p></div><p>Speaking as somebody currently living on the proceeds of a software company I sold, this is a naive view.</p><p>It's not enough to have an app people want.  You have to (a) sell it for enough money to make a profit and (b) keep support costs down enough so your sales profit doesn't disappear.</p><p>Right off the bat, when you sell software, it's not a matter of "a lot of people wanting" your product; it's how many want it at the price you set.  Let's say you have a product that nobody would be willing to spend much money for, but you could sell it for about the price of a cup of coffee.  Let's suppose the product is cheap to make and after you sell it your customers never call you.  You can make money with that.</p><p>Suppose you come up with a ringtone.  It takes you a week to get it into whereever you are selling it, then 5000 customers download it at $1.99, of which you clear $1.00 after the store gets its cut.  $5000 for a week of work isn't going to make you rich, but it's a respectable payday.  You can live off of that kind of project.</p><p>Is this something that people "want"? Well, sure, so long as its priced cheap.   The key is that of those 5000 customers, you'll hear from maybe one or two, and you can just pay them $2.00 to go away.</p><p>Now suppose you (like I did) develop some kind of mobile data collection app that drives important enterprise decisions.  That's pretty damned valuable.  You can easily convince a company to pay you $500 *per seat*.  The problem is that even if you could wish the software into existence, the customers need more than $500 per seat of support.  In fact that's why an open source model works very well for critical systems -- you give the software away and charge for the real expensive parts.  In any case, my calculations showed that we broke even on a $10,000 sale, after all was said and done, so we might as *well* have given the software away.   We typically sold consulting services at anywhere from $20,000 to $50,000 a pop, which was where we made our money.  Believe me, when you've got a team of six engineers, a $20,000 project doesn't look so big.</p><p>The point is that the "build a better mousetrap" theory is simply wrong.</p><p>Your ringtones and iFarts are bottom feeders in the world of app development.   They are profitable for their developers precisely because users don't care very much about them.  Price a product like that low enough and you can make money.</p><p>The kind of apps that developers garner respect and admiration for developing are a different kettle of fish.  It's *hard* to make a profit selling apps that people really care about, because customers demand a relationship with you.  That's expensive.</p><p>The last thing you need is a third party inserting itself into that expensive and delicate process -- especially an opaque, unpredictable one.   You work with your customers and discover they really need some extra functionality. You build it, then have to wait to find out whether you can sell it?  That's nuts.  You need that like you need a hole in the head.</p><p>And this is even worse: you make a portfolio of apps, and then you can't sell them to a different developer? That's a critical exit strategy for many small developers.  They have the vision and brains to create an app, but don't have the size to support it. So they develop and market it, and sell it to somebody who is already supporting apps for the main customer base.  That's what I did when I sold *my* business.  When I had more customers that I could know personally, it wasn't fun anymore so I told one company that if they didn't buy the software I'd sell it their competitor.</p><p>Basically, what Apple is telling is that the iPhone is *still* not a platform.   It's a music playing phone that can also run toys like iFart.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only ones to " stick it out " are the ones who are the most likely to profit .
This tends to be apps people mostly want.Speaking as somebody currently living on the proceeds of a software company I sold , this is a naive view.It 's not enough to have an app people want .
You have to ( a ) sell it for enough money to make a profit and ( b ) keep support costs down enough so your sales profit does n't disappear.Right off the bat , when you sell software , it 's not a matter of " a lot of people wanting " your product ; it 's how many want it at the price you set .
Let 's say you have a product that nobody would be willing to spend much money for , but you could sell it for about the price of a cup of coffee .
Let 's suppose the product is cheap to make and after you sell it your customers never call you .
You can make money with that.Suppose you come up with a ringtone .
It takes you a week to get it into whereever you are selling it , then 5000 customers download it at $ 1.99 , of which you clear $ 1.00 after the store gets its cut .
$ 5000 for a week of work is n't going to make you rich , but it 's a respectable payday .
You can live off of that kind of project.Is this something that people " want " ?
Well , sure , so long as its priced cheap .
The key is that of those 5000 customers , you 'll hear from maybe one or two , and you can just pay them $ 2.00 to go away.Now suppose you ( like I did ) develop some kind of mobile data collection app that drives important enterprise decisions .
That 's pretty damned valuable .
You can easily convince a company to pay you $ 500 * per seat * .
The problem is that even if you could wish the software into existence , the customers need more than $ 500 per seat of support .
In fact that 's why an open source model works very well for critical systems -- you give the software away and charge for the real expensive parts .
In any case , my calculations showed that we broke even on a $ 10,000 sale , after all was said and done , so we might as * well * have given the software away .
We typically sold consulting services at anywhere from $ 20,000 to $ 50,000 a pop , which was where we made our money .
Believe me , when you 've got a team of six engineers , a $ 20,000 project does n't look so big.The point is that the " build a better mousetrap " theory is simply wrong.Your ringtones and iFarts are bottom feeders in the world of app development .
They are profitable for their developers precisely because users do n't care very much about them .
Price a product like that low enough and you can make money.The kind of apps that developers garner respect and admiration for developing are a different kettle of fish .
It 's * hard * to make a profit selling apps that people really care about , because customers demand a relationship with you .
That 's expensive.The last thing you need is a third party inserting itself into that expensive and delicate process -- especially an opaque , unpredictable one .
You work with your customers and discover they really need some extra functionality .
You build it , then have to wait to find out whether you can sell it ?
That 's nuts .
You need that like you need a hole in the head.And this is even worse : you make a portfolio of apps , and then you ca n't sell them to a different developer ?
That 's a critical exit strategy for many small developers .
They have the vision and brains to create an app , but do n't have the size to support it .
So they develop and market it , and sell it to somebody who is already supporting apps for the main customer base .
That 's what I did when I sold * my * business .
When I had more customers that I could know personally , it was n't fun anymore so I told one company that if they did n't buy the software I 'd sell it their competitor.Basically , what Apple is telling is that the iPhone is * still * not a platform .
It 's a music playing phone that can also run toys like iFart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only ones to "stick it out" are the ones who are the most likely to profit.
This tends to be apps people mostly want.Speaking as somebody currently living on the proceeds of a software company I sold, this is a naive view.It's not enough to have an app people want.
You have to (a) sell it for enough money to make a profit and (b) keep support costs down enough so your sales profit doesn't disappear.Right off the bat, when you sell software, it's not a matter of "a lot of people wanting" your product; it's how many want it at the price you set.
Let's say you have a product that nobody would be willing to spend much money for, but you could sell it for about the price of a cup of coffee.
Let's suppose the product is cheap to make and after you sell it your customers never call you.
You can make money with that.Suppose you come up with a ringtone.
It takes you a week to get it into whereever you are selling it, then 5000 customers download it at $1.99, of which you clear $1.00 after the store gets its cut.
$5000 for a week of work isn't going to make you rich, but it's a respectable payday.
You can live off of that kind of project.Is this something that people "want"?
Well, sure, so long as its priced cheap.
The key is that of those 5000 customers, you'll hear from maybe one or two, and you can just pay them $2.00 to go away.Now suppose you (like I did) develop some kind of mobile data collection app that drives important enterprise decisions.
That's pretty damned valuable.
You can easily convince a company to pay you $500 *per seat*.
The problem is that even if you could wish the software into existence, the customers need more than $500 per seat of support.
In fact that's why an open source model works very well for critical systems -- you give the software away and charge for the real expensive parts.
In any case, my calculations showed that we broke even on a $10,000 sale, after all was said and done, so we might as *well* have given the software away.
We typically sold consulting services at anywhere from $20,000 to $50,000 a pop, which was where we made our money.
Believe me, when you've got a team of six engineers, a $20,000 project doesn't look so big.The point is that the "build a better mousetrap" theory is simply wrong.Your ringtones and iFarts are bottom feeders in the world of app development.
They are profitable for their developers precisely because users don't care very much about them.
Price a product like that low enough and you can make money.The kind of apps that developers garner respect and admiration for developing are a different kettle of fish.
It's *hard* to make a profit selling apps that people really care about, because customers demand a relationship with you.
That's expensive.The last thing you need is a third party inserting itself into that expensive and delicate process -- especially an opaque, unpredictable one.
You work with your customers and discover they really need some extra functionality.
You build it, then have to wait to find out whether you can sell it?
That's nuts.
You need that like you need a hole in the head.And this is even worse: you make a portfolio of apps, and then you can't sell them to a different developer?
That's a critical exit strategy for many small developers.
They have the vision and brains to create an app, but don't have the size to support it.
So they develop and market it, and sell it to somebody who is already supporting apps for the main customer base.
That's what I did when I sold *my* business.
When I had more customers that I could know personally, it wasn't fun anymore so I told one company that if they didn't buy the software I'd sell it their competitor.Basically, what Apple is telling is that the iPhone is *still* not a platform.
It's a music playing phone that can also run toys like iFart.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159242</id>
	<title>Re:Dear fleeing developers.</title>
	<author>tsm\_sf</author>
	<datestamp>1258655160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Love the phone, hate the name.</p><p>For some reason it makes me think of custard with cat hair in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Love the phone , hate the name.For some reason it makes me think of custard with cat hair in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Love the phone, hate the name.For some reason it makes me think of custard with cat hair in it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159856</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math, shall we?</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1258657080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>100,000 apps does not translate to 100,000 developers.  Believe it or not, but someone who creates such a groundbreaking application as iFart could also turn around and create another magnum opus such as Bubblewrap.  Similarly, the Genius minds behind Ruler may also decide to branch out and develop A Level.  And considering that all 4 of those are (or were) in the top 10 for most popular apps, why not?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>100,000 apps does not translate to 100,000 developers .
Believe it or not , but someone who creates such a groundbreaking application as iFart could also turn around and create another magnum opus such as Bubblewrap .
Similarly , the Genius minds behind Ruler may also decide to branch out and develop A Level .
And considering that all 4 of those are ( or were ) in the top 10 for most popular apps , why not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>100,000 apps does not translate to 100,000 developers.
Believe it or not, but someone who creates such a groundbreaking application as iFart could also turn around and create another magnum opus such as Bubblewrap.
Similarly, the Genius minds behind Ruler may also decide to branch out and develop A Level.
And considering that all 4 of those are (or were) in the top 10 for most popular apps, why not?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348</id>
	<title>Cry wolf</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1258655520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Read the following sentences VERY carefully:
</p><p> <i>Facebook's Joe Hewitt, Second Gear's Justin Williams, and long-time Mac software developer Rogue Amoeba have <b>all</b> recently decided that enough is enough, and the loss of these [<b>two?</b>]developers and others [<b>what others</b>]</i>
</p><p>What a load of weasel language. ALL should really be both, and "these" should really clarify that "these" is only two. And where are the others?
</p><p>There are 100.000 apps out there. Now call me silly but while there are a lot of possible programs I think that it is safe to conclude there won't be many CAD applications or ACID databases among them, the rules of the app store and the limitations of the iPhone hardware limit what is available. So a lot of it is meaningless drivel that nobody will miss.
</p><p>And this respected developer mentioned in both story links? Did a facebook app. ONE facebook app... OMG NOSERS!!1!!!! How will they EVER find anyone else to write something like that!
</p><p>Sorry, everyone knows that Apple likes total and complete control, people knew this when they signed up for it and they were happy to take the dollars that came with it. Why should Apple change?
</p><p>Don't get me wrong, I think the one good thing about Bill Gates/Steve Ballmer is that at least they are not Steve Jobs or IT would REALLY be screwed but what is the issue her? What next, companies complaining that they can't add nudity to a 360 game? Then don't develop for a closed format with a megalomaniac calling the shots. Either you support open formats OR you accept that you WILL be fucked up the ass, no lube and bite your tongue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Read the following sentences VERY carefully : Facebook 's Joe Hewitt , Second Gear 's Justin Williams , and long-time Mac software developer Rogue Amoeba have all recently decided that enough is enough , and the loss of these [ two ?
] developers and others [ what others ] What a load of weasel language .
ALL should really be both , and " these " should really clarify that " these " is only two .
And where are the others ?
There are 100.000 apps out there .
Now call me silly but while there are a lot of possible programs I think that it is safe to conclude there wo n't be many CAD applications or ACID databases among them , the rules of the app store and the limitations of the iPhone hardware limit what is available .
So a lot of it is meaningless drivel that nobody will miss .
And this respected developer mentioned in both story links ?
Did a facebook app .
ONE facebook app... OMG NOSERS ! ! 1 ! ! ! !
How will they EVER find anyone else to write something like that !
Sorry , everyone knows that Apple likes total and complete control , people knew this when they signed up for it and they were happy to take the dollars that came with it .
Why should Apple change ?
Do n't get me wrong , I think the one good thing about Bill Gates/Steve Ballmer is that at least they are not Steve Jobs or IT would REALLY be screwed but what is the issue her ?
What next , companies complaining that they ca n't add nudity to a 360 game ?
Then do n't develop for a closed format with a megalomaniac calling the shots .
Either you support open formats OR you accept that you WILL be fucked up the ass , no lube and bite your tongue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Read the following sentences VERY carefully:
 Facebook's Joe Hewitt, Second Gear's Justin Williams, and long-time Mac software developer Rogue Amoeba have all recently decided that enough is enough, and the loss of these [two?
]developers and others [what others]
What a load of weasel language.
ALL should really be both, and "these" should really clarify that "these" is only two.
And where are the others?
There are 100.000 apps out there.
Now call me silly but while there are a lot of possible programs I think that it is safe to conclude there won't be many CAD applications or ACID databases among them, the rules of the app store and the limitations of the iPhone hardware limit what is available.
So a lot of it is meaningless drivel that nobody will miss.
And this respected developer mentioned in both story links?
Did a facebook app.
ONE facebook app... OMG NOSERS!!1!!!!
How will they EVER find anyone else to write something like that!
Sorry, everyone knows that Apple likes total and complete control, people knew this when they signed up for it and they were happy to take the dollars that came with it.
Why should Apple change?
Don't get me wrong, I think the one good thing about Bill Gates/Steve Ballmer is that at least they are not Steve Jobs or IT would REALLY be screwed but what is the issue her?
What next, companies complaining that they can't add nudity to a 360 game?
Then don't develop for a closed format with a megalomaniac calling the shots.
Either you support open formats OR you accept that you WILL be fucked up the ass, no lube and bite your tongue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165552</id>
	<title>Re:Not lower quality apps.</title>
	<author>BobMcD</author>
	<datestamp>1258632720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The developer who flits from language to language trying to get rich off the latest trend isn't going to be the guy I want to buy apps from anyway. I'd rather buy something from a hardcore guy who won't give up on a platform no matter what the world says</p></div><p>...that Facebook thing will never catch on when Geocities is everything anyone really needs...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The developer who flits from language to language trying to get rich off the latest trend is n't going to be the guy I want to buy apps from anyway .
I 'd rather buy something from a hardcore guy who wo n't give up on a platform no matter what the world says...that Facebook thing will never catch on when Geocities is everything anyone really needs.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The developer who flits from language to language trying to get rich off the latest trend isn't going to be the guy I want to buy apps from anyway.
I'd rather buy something from a hardcore guy who won't give up on a platform no matter what the world says...that Facebook thing will never catch on when Geocities is everything anyone really needs...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159188</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159014</id>
	<title>typical apple bait and switch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stevie's been doing it since the days of disco.<br>Jobs wants developers in a cage; just as any fashion designer wants the actual labor in a sweat shop in an overseas dictatorship.  Just don't tax it; that'd be interfering in "free trade".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stevie 's been doing it since the days of disco.Jobs wants developers in a cage ; just as any fashion designer wants the actual labor in a sweat shop in an overseas dictatorship .
Just do n't tax it ; that 'd be interfering in " free trade " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stevie's been doing it since the days of disco.Jobs wants developers in a cage; just as any fashion designer wants the actual labor in a sweat shop in an overseas dictatorship.
Just don't tax it; that'd be interfering in "free trade".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163326</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>pohl</author>
	<datestamp>1258624980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everybody take note here that the defense is not claiming that the garden has no walls, but is only claiming that they are made of a different material.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everybody take note here that the defense is not claiming that the garden has no walls , but is only claiming that they are made of a different material .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everybody take note here that the defense is not claiming that the garden has no walls, but is only claiming that they are made of a different material.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159550</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159678
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30167738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30206852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162048
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30169352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30168232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30193632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30169524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30177866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30172012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30168126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30169950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_164229_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30170024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30193632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30168232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162526
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159022
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159016
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159668
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160810
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161494
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165552
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159858
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161844
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159888
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30170024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160222
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159834
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161026
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30167738
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159392
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161442
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159686
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161314
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159198
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159550
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163326
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160118
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159990
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159576
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159754
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159744
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159796
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30169950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159664
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160438
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162706
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159780
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30172012
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159408
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162242
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159904
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166478
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163584
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163560
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163392
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160162
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164416
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30169524
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30160468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159716
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161152
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162660
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30206852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159310
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161730
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164846
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30177866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162140
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161892
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30165916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159428
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30169352
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163668
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30168126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159524
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30163064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161960
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158990
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30161086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30166338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30162702
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_164229.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30158904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30159396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_164229.30164902
</commentlist>
</conversation>
