<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_20_1527257</id>
	<title>Netbooks Have Higher Failure Rate Than Laptops</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1258741920000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Barence writes <i>"Netbooks are more likely to fail within the first year than their more expensive laptop brethren, according to new research. SquareTrade, an independent US warranty provider, analyzed the failure rates of more than 30,000 laptops covered by its own warranties. It found that <a href="http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/asus-toshiba-notebooks-top-squaretrades-reliability-figures/?news=123">5.8\% of netbooks malfunctioned within the first year</a>, compared to 4.7\% for regular laptops and 4.2\% for premium laptops costing more than $1,000. The research also raises question marks over the legendary reliability of Macs. Three PC manufacturers &mdash; Asus, Toshiba, and Sony &mdash; boasted better reliability rates than Apple. Macs have a 17.4\% malfunction rate over three years, compared to market-leader Asus, which has a 15.6\% failure rate. HP was the worst of the nine PC vendors listed, with a malfunction rate of 25.6\% over three years."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Barence writes " Netbooks are more likely to fail within the first year than their more expensive laptop brethren , according to new research .
SquareTrade , an independent US warranty provider , analyzed the failure rates of more than 30,000 laptops covered by its own warranties .
It found that 5.8 \ % of netbooks malfunctioned within the first year , compared to 4.7 \ % for regular laptops and 4.2 \ % for premium laptops costing more than $ 1,000 .
The research also raises question marks over the legendary reliability of Macs .
Three PC manufacturers    Asus , Toshiba , and Sony    boasted better reliability rates than Apple .
Macs have a 17.4 \ % malfunction rate over three years , compared to market-leader Asus , which has a 15.6 \ % failure rate .
HP was the worst of the nine PC vendors listed , with a malfunction rate of 25.6 \ % over three years .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Barence writes "Netbooks are more likely to fail within the first year than their more expensive laptop brethren, according to new research.
SquareTrade, an independent US warranty provider, analyzed the failure rates of more than 30,000 laptops covered by its own warranties.
It found that 5.8\% of netbooks malfunctioned within the first year, compared to 4.7\% for regular laptops and 4.2\% for premium laptops costing more than $1,000.
The research also raises question marks over the legendary reliability of Macs.
Three PC manufacturers — Asus, Toshiba, and Sony — boasted better reliability rates than Apple.
Macs have a 17.4\% malfunction rate over three years, compared to market-leader Asus, which has a 15.6\% failure rate.
HP was the worst of the nine PC vendors listed, with a malfunction rate of 25.6\% over three years.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175498</id>
	<title>Re:You think?</title>
	<author>tftp</author>
	<datestamp>1258748700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>anyone here know where I could get one (or at least, a 30x30x7 (mm))?</i>
</p><p>
Don't know about x7, but here is <a href="http://search.digikey.com/scripts/dksearch/dksus.dll?Detail&amp;name=259-1328-ND" title="digikey.com">30mm L x 30mm H x 6mm W</a> [digikey.com] fan. This is a 5V part without tachometer. There is also 259-1327-ND which produces higher airflow (and is noisier, I'd guess.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>anyone here know where I could get one ( or at least , a 30x30x7 ( mm ) ) ?
Do n't know about x7 , but here is 30mm L x 30mm H x 6mm W [ digikey.com ] fan .
This is a 5V part without tachometer .
There is also 259-1327-ND which produces higher airflow ( and is noisier , I 'd guess .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext> anyone here know where I could get one (or at least, a 30x30x7 (mm))?
Don't know about x7, but here is 30mm L x 30mm H x 6mm W [digikey.com] fan.
This is a 5V part without tachometer.
There is also 259-1327-ND which produces higher airflow (and is noisier, I'd guess.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175258</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258747860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not necessarily cheapness. Netbooks are named differently than laptops because they have different characteristics, ones which allow more convenient use in different environments. So my first guess was that the explanation is likely "Netbooks used in harsher environments than laptops". They're smaller, so a person might carry one around more, put more wear on it per unit time.

To summarize: netbooks have higher failure rate than laptops, cellphones have higher failure rates than cordless phones, and desktop computers have a higher failure rate than museum-piece computers that are never turned on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not necessarily cheapness .
Netbooks are named differently than laptops because they have different characteristics , ones which allow more convenient use in different environments .
So my first guess was that the explanation is likely " Netbooks used in harsher environments than laptops " .
They 're smaller , so a person might carry one around more , put more wear on it per unit time .
To summarize : netbooks have higher failure rate than laptops , cellphones have higher failure rates than cordless phones , and desktop computers have a higher failure rate than museum-piece computers that are never turned on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not necessarily cheapness.
Netbooks are named differently than laptops because they have different characteristics, ones which allow more convenient use in different environments.
So my first guess was that the explanation is likely "Netbooks used in harsher environments than laptops".
They're smaller, so a person might carry one around more, put more wear on it per unit time.
To summarize: netbooks have higher failure rate than laptops, cellphones have higher failure rates than cordless phones, and desktop computers have a higher failure rate than museum-piece computers that are never turned on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174584</id>
	<title>Hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258745820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Macs aren't more reliable, they just get less use (nothing important runs on them), so they take longer to wear out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Macs are n't more reliable , they just get less use ( nothing important runs on them ) , so they take longer to wear out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Macs aren't more reliable, they just get less use (nothing important runs on them), so they take longer to wear out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634</id>
	<title>Netbooks get handled a lot rougher . . .</title>
	<author>fuzzylollipop</author>
	<datestamp>1258746000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>They are cheaper and lighter and more portable and get handled a lot rougher than a $1000+ laptop.
Nothing about this is news.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They are cheaper and lighter and more portable and get handled a lot rougher than a $ 1000 + laptop .
Nothing about this is news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are cheaper and lighter and more portable and get handled a lot rougher than a $1000+ laptop.
Nothing about this is news.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175042</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>Anonymusing</author>
	<datestamp>1258747260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who professionally provided tech support for Macs for more than 15 years, I have to disagree with you. I do think that when Macs have problems, they have BIG problems, but overall they have proven (to me anyway) that they are generally much more reliable than systems made by Windows PC vendors.
</p><p>As for this SquareTrade article, it wouldn't surprise me if Apple fell a few points behind other manufacturers, though I cannot possibly imagine why someone would buy a new Mac and get a SquareTrade warranty instead of Apple's excellent 3-year warranty.  Makes me wonder if the Macs covered by SquareTrade are largely used?  You can't buy them at Target.
</p><p>I also find it very odd that this year's SquareTrade report is almost entirely the reverse of <a href="http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Squaretrade-888128.html" title="marketwire.com">last year's</a> [marketwire.com], when HP came out on top. Also, Lenovo is <a href="http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/11/20/lenovo-responds-to-laptop-reliability-study/1" title="bit-tech.net">calling shenanigans</a> [bit-tech.net] on this year's data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who professionally provided tech support for Macs for more than 15 years , I have to disagree with you .
I do think that when Macs have problems , they have BIG problems , but overall they have proven ( to me anyway ) that they are generally much more reliable than systems made by Windows PC vendors .
As for this SquareTrade article , it would n't surprise me if Apple fell a few points behind other manufacturers , though I can not possibly imagine why someone would buy a new Mac and get a SquareTrade warranty instead of Apple 's excellent 3-year warranty .
Makes me wonder if the Macs covered by SquareTrade are largely used ?
You ca n't buy them at Target .
I also find it very odd that this year 's SquareTrade report is almost entirely the reverse of last year 's [ marketwire.com ] , when HP came out on top .
Also , Lenovo is calling shenanigans [ bit-tech.net ] on this year 's data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who professionally provided tech support for Macs for more than 15 years, I have to disagree with you.
I do think that when Macs have problems, they have BIG problems, but overall they have proven (to me anyway) that they are generally much more reliable than systems made by Windows PC vendors.
As for this SquareTrade article, it wouldn't surprise me if Apple fell a few points behind other manufacturers, though I cannot possibly imagine why someone would buy a new Mac and get a SquareTrade warranty instead of Apple's excellent 3-year warranty.
Makes me wonder if the Macs covered by SquareTrade are largely used?
You can't buy them at Target.
I also find it very odd that this year's SquareTrade report is almost entirely the reverse of last year's [marketwire.com], when HP came out on top.
Also, Lenovo is calling shenanigans [bit-tech.net] on this year's data.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176182</id>
	<title>Re:Jive with anyone else's experience.</title>
	<author>King\_TJ</author>
	<datestamp>1258708020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not sure what type of I.T. support you do, but could your experiences be a bit limited because you work in corporate I.T. where only certain brands and models were purchased in any quantity?</p><p>I've done quite a bit of on-site service for people, and my experiences line up fairly accurately with some of this.  I definitely see a *lot* of HP notebook failures out there.  Dell always seemed to me like they build "hit and miss" products.  It's a crap-shoot with them, essentially.  They've produced some of the most durable and reliable laptops out there, and turned around and produced some total duds that practically ALL had failures in a 2 year time-frame.  You can't really make blanket statements about Dell because depending on when you analyze the data, they're going to look really good, somewhere right in the middle, or really bad.</p><p>I used to like Toshiba products, but I've come to realize that they have a pretty high long-term failure rate.  Satellites, especially, seem to suffer from a large number of motherboard issues.  (Ever run across one that lets you power it on but powers right back off after 2 seconds or so?  Usually a bad motherboard, and I run into it pretty often.)  A buddy of mine had a Toshiba Qosmio (high-end media centric model) that died like that just out of the factory warranty period.  Luckily, Toshiba had a "silent recall" on that one, which we found out about online.  He was able to call in, demand they repair it under said recall, and get it fixed free -- but only after getting past a 1st. level tech. on the phone who wanted to charge him for the repair and denied knowledge of any recall.....</p><p>I haven't had real good experiences with Sony laptops either, all in all.  It seems like they build really attractive and sleek machines, but they break fairly easily.</p><p>I was a bit surprised that Lenovo didn't rate better.  I know their quality has gone downhill from back when IBM owned the Thinkpad line (and they weren't assembled in China). but they still seem to take a lot of design cues from the IBM days, and as a result, seem fairly well-built.  They tend to have fewer "bells and whistles" than some models too, so less stuff to go wrong.</p><p>And Apple?  I have a lot of experience with their notebooks.  They do need warranty service occasionally.  The idea that "they practically never break!" is kind of a myth.  I mean, they do use the same hard drives and displays as everyone else<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....    But I've had better than average results getting an Apple notebook serviced by Apple while under warranty, and I think more people buy the AppleCare warranties on them up-front.  If you have an issue and Apple overnights you a return mailer box to put it in, fixes it in 1 day, and overnights it back, how annoyed are you going to be about the problem vs. the guy with some other laptop that has to wait WEEKS for a repair?   That's what helps Apple keep in the lead with "customer satisfaction", even if they don't have the absolutely least likely to break systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not sure what type of I.T .
support you do , but could your experiences be a bit limited because you work in corporate I.T .
where only certain brands and models were purchased in any quantity ? I 've done quite a bit of on-site service for people , and my experiences line up fairly accurately with some of this .
I definitely see a * lot * of HP notebook failures out there .
Dell always seemed to me like they build " hit and miss " products .
It 's a crap-shoot with them , essentially .
They 've produced some of the most durable and reliable laptops out there , and turned around and produced some total duds that practically ALL had failures in a 2 year time-frame .
You ca n't really make blanket statements about Dell because depending on when you analyze the data , they 're going to look really good , somewhere right in the middle , or really bad.I used to like Toshiba products , but I 've come to realize that they have a pretty high long-term failure rate .
Satellites , especially , seem to suffer from a large number of motherboard issues .
( Ever run across one that lets you power it on but powers right back off after 2 seconds or so ?
Usually a bad motherboard , and I run into it pretty often .
) A buddy of mine had a Toshiba Qosmio ( high-end media centric model ) that died like that just out of the factory warranty period .
Luckily , Toshiba had a " silent recall " on that one , which we found out about online .
He was able to call in , demand they repair it under said recall , and get it fixed free -- but only after getting past a 1st .
level tech .
on the phone who wanted to charge him for the repair and denied knowledge of any recall.....I have n't had real good experiences with Sony laptops either , all in all .
It seems like they build really attractive and sleek machines , but they break fairly easily.I was a bit surprised that Lenovo did n't rate better .
I know their quality has gone downhill from back when IBM owned the Thinkpad line ( and they were n't assembled in China ) .
but they still seem to take a lot of design cues from the IBM days , and as a result , seem fairly well-built .
They tend to have fewer " bells and whistles " than some models too , so less stuff to go wrong.And Apple ?
I have a lot of experience with their notebooks .
They do need warranty service occasionally .
The idea that " they practically never break !
" is kind of a myth .
I mean , they do use the same hard drives and displays as everyone else .... But I 've had better than average results getting an Apple notebook serviced by Apple while under warranty , and I think more people buy the AppleCare warranties on them up-front .
If you have an issue and Apple overnights you a return mailer box to put it in , fixes it in 1 day , and overnights it back , how annoyed are you going to be about the problem vs. the guy with some other laptop that has to wait WEEKS for a repair ?
That 's what helps Apple keep in the lead with " customer satisfaction " , even if they do n't have the absolutely least likely to break systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not sure what type of I.T.
support you do, but could your experiences be a bit limited because you work in corporate I.T.
where only certain brands and models were purchased in any quantity?I've done quite a bit of on-site service for people, and my experiences line up fairly accurately with some of this.
I definitely see a *lot* of HP notebook failures out there.
Dell always seemed to me like they build "hit and miss" products.
It's a crap-shoot with them, essentially.
They've produced some of the most durable and reliable laptops out there, and turned around and produced some total duds that practically ALL had failures in a 2 year time-frame.
You can't really make blanket statements about Dell because depending on when you analyze the data, they're going to look really good, somewhere right in the middle, or really bad.I used to like Toshiba products, but I've come to realize that they have a pretty high long-term failure rate.
Satellites, especially, seem to suffer from a large number of motherboard issues.
(Ever run across one that lets you power it on but powers right back off after 2 seconds or so?
Usually a bad motherboard, and I run into it pretty often.
)  A buddy of mine had a Toshiba Qosmio (high-end media centric model) that died like that just out of the factory warranty period.
Luckily, Toshiba had a "silent recall" on that one, which we found out about online.
He was able to call in, demand they repair it under said recall, and get it fixed free -- but only after getting past a 1st.
level tech.
on the phone who wanted to charge him for the repair and denied knowledge of any recall.....I haven't had real good experiences with Sony laptops either, all in all.
It seems like they build really attractive and sleek machines, but they break fairly easily.I was a bit surprised that Lenovo didn't rate better.
I know their quality has gone downhill from back when IBM owned the Thinkpad line (and they weren't assembled in China).
but they still seem to take a lot of design cues from the IBM days, and as a result, seem fairly well-built.
They tend to have fewer "bells and whistles" than some models too, so less stuff to go wrong.And Apple?
I have a lot of experience with their notebooks.
They do need warranty service occasionally.
The idea that "they practically never break!
" is kind of a myth.
I mean, they do use the same hard drives and displays as everyone else ....    But I've had better than average results getting an Apple notebook serviced by Apple while under warranty, and I think more people buy the AppleCare warranties on them up-front.
If you have an issue and Apple overnights you a return mailer box to put it in, fixes it in 1 day, and overnights it back, how annoyed are you going to be about the problem vs. the guy with some other laptop that has to wait WEEKS for a repair?
That's what helps Apple keep in the lead with "customer satisfaction", even if they don't have the absolutely least likely to break systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176378</id>
	<title>Re:Aha!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258708680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I will never buy HP again. My previous laptop was a Compaq(For those out of the loop or just too young, Compaq was bought by HP) and my senior year of college, I got the motherboard replaced on warranty a dozen times or more(Our college had a program to give free laptops to students and they kept spare motherboards on hand because this was a very frequent occurrence).
<br> <br>
My current HP had its battery replaced twice because it had died within 3 months of the battery coming out of the box(both times) and the only reason I didn't replace it more is because it was just going to fail again(Why replace faulty parts with more faulty parts? In case you couldn't guess, it died a total of three times and I just didn't care anymore after the third. My laptop is now essentially a desktop).   The second time they even brought the laptop in to see if it was causing the battery failures.   It was but they couldn't fix it.
<br> <br>
Even worse, they held my credit card number ransom.   They said if I didn't send the old battery in after they sent me the replacement, they would charge me for a new one.   Keep in mind that they logged onto my computer to check to see if my battery was indeed dead before confirming that it was covered under warranty, but they still didn't trust me enough to return a brick that they were just going to throw away/recycle.   The doesn't even mention that they could have sent me an empty box and had me send them the dead battery first since it was dead and I couldn't use it anyway.
<br> <br>
Whatever, this article only supports me in my hatred of HP products.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I will never buy HP again .
My previous laptop was a Compaq ( For those out of the loop or just too young , Compaq was bought by HP ) and my senior year of college , I got the motherboard replaced on warranty a dozen times or more ( Our college had a program to give free laptops to students and they kept spare motherboards on hand because this was a very frequent occurrence ) .
My current HP had its battery replaced twice because it had died within 3 months of the battery coming out of the box ( both times ) and the only reason I did n't replace it more is because it was just going to fail again ( Why replace faulty parts with more faulty parts ?
In case you could n't guess , it died a total of three times and I just did n't care anymore after the third .
My laptop is now essentially a desktop ) .
The second time they even brought the laptop in to see if it was causing the battery failures .
It was but they could n't fix it .
Even worse , they held my credit card number ransom .
They said if I did n't send the old battery in after they sent me the replacement , they would charge me for a new one .
Keep in mind that they logged onto my computer to check to see if my battery was indeed dead before confirming that it was covered under warranty , but they still did n't trust me enough to return a brick that they were just going to throw away/recycle .
The does n't even mention that they could have sent me an empty box and had me send them the dead battery first since it was dead and I could n't use it anyway .
Whatever , this article only supports me in my hatred of HP products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will never buy HP again.
My previous laptop was a Compaq(For those out of the loop or just too young, Compaq was bought by HP) and my senior year of college, I got the motherboard replaced on warranty a dozen times or more(Our college had a program to give free laptops to students and they kept spare motherboards on hand because this was a very frequent occurrence).
My current HP had its battery replaced twice because it had died within 3 months of the battery coming out of the box(both times) and the only reason I didn't replace it more is because it was just going to fail again(Why replace faulty parts with more faulty parts?
In case you couldn't guess, it died a total of three times and I just didn't care anymore after the third.
My laptop is now essentially a desktop).
The second time they even brought the laptop in to see if it was causing the battery failures.
It was but they couldn't fix it.
Even worse, they held my credit card number ransom.
They said if I didn't send the old battery in after they sent me the replacement, they would charge me for a new one.
Keep in mind that they logged onto my computer to check to see if my battery was indeed dead before confirming that it was covered under warranty, but they still didn't trust me enough to return a brick that they were just going to throw away/recycle.
The doesn't even mention that they could have sent me an empty box and had me send them the dead battery first since it was dead and I couldn't use it anyway.
Whatever, this article only supports me in my hatred of HP products.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174632</id>
	<title>what do you expect?  they are consumable devices</title>
	<author>digitalsushi</author>
	<datestamp>1258745940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're made to be chucked in a dumpster at the airport when they fizz out.  This just sounds like a vector to complain about something that's junky cause it's cheap being junky.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're made to be chucked in a dumpster at the airport when they fizz out .
This just sounds like a vector to complain about something that 's junky cause it 's cheap being junky .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're made to be chucked in a dumpster at the airport when they fizz out.
This just sounds like a vector to complain about something that's junky cause it's cheap being junky.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176882</id>
	<title>Totally off-topic, BUT looking for the perfect net</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1258710480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am looking for the perfect netbook, and surely someone on slashdot knows where to find it?
</p><p>Touchscreen, size SSD, HD's don't survive long on a moving train and are slow as hell anyway.
</p><p>3G internal modem. (Wifi is just not available in enough places)
</p><p>More then 1G of memory.
</p><p>Dual core (atom speed is fine, dual really helps with responsiveness)
</p><p>Large battery (9 cell)
</p><p>Ideally: bluetooth internal. 1-2 interal USB slots (so that a stick or whatever doesn't have to stick out)
</p><p>Tablet option:
</p><p>Video output from thin cable, not the old d-sub thank you very much.
</p><p>Anyone know a netbook like this? I need something that works on the move and can stand a bit of a beating. I am not suprised they fail more often, my Aspire one ZG5 gets an amount of abuse that I would never dare with a laptop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am looking for the perfect netbook , and surely someone on slashdot knows where to find it ?
Touchscreen , size SSD , HD 's do n't survive long on a moving train and are slow as hell anyway .
3G internal modem .
( Wifi is just not available in enough places ) More then 1G of memory .
Dual core ( atom speed is fine , dual really helps with responsiveness ) Large battery ( 9 cell ) Ideally : bluetooth internal .
1-2 interal USB slots ( so that a stick or whatever does n't have to stick out ) Tablet option : Video output from thin cable , not the old d-sub thank you very much .
Anyone know a netbook like this ?
I need something that works on the move and can stand a bit of a beating .
I am not suprised they fail more often , my Aspire one ZG5 gets an amount of abuse that I would never dare with a laptop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am looking for the perfect netbook, and surely someone on slashdot knows where to find it?
Touchscreen, size SSD, HD's don't survive long on a moving train and are slow as hell anyway.
3G internal modem.
(Wifi is just not available in enough places)
More then 1G of memory.
Dual core (atom speed is fine, dual really helps with responsiveness)
Large battery (9 cell)
Ideally: bluetooth internal.
1-2 interal USB slots (so that a stick or whatever doesn't have to stick out)
Tablet option:
Video output from thin cable, not the old d-sub thank you very much.
Anyone know a netbook like this?
I need something that works on the move and can stand a bit of a beating.
I am not suprised they fail more often, my Aspire one ZG5 gets an amount of abuse that I would never dare with a laptop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175422</id>
	<title>probably because people bang on them harder...</title>
	<author>Phizzle</author>
	<datestamp>1258748520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anecdotal evidence based on practical experience: I dragged my Samsung NC20 all over Europe and obscure parts of Russia and before that I had a well travelled Samsung NC10 and abused the crap out of it and they are both working just fine. These units went through customs time after time, banged around, exposed to -10c temperatures, countless flights, and copious exposure to the funky Soviet Era power wiring with no ill effects!<br> I had much worse luck with my HP DV9000 laptop (something happened to the freaking hinge and the LCD would just cut out from time to time and reboot the system) and my Lenovo G530 (two functions keys mysteriously stopped working). The funny thing is I treated the laptops much better than the netbooks - go figure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anecdotal evidence based on practical experience : I dragged my Samsung NC20 all over Europe and obscure parts of Russia and before that I had a well travelled Samsung NC10 and abused the crap out of it and they are both working just fine .
These units went through customs time after time , banged around , exposed to -10c temperatures , countless flights , and copious exposure to the funky Soviet Era power wiring with no ill effects !
I had much worse luck with my HP DV9000 laptop ( something happened to the freaking hinge and the LCD would just cut out from time to time and reboot the system ) and my Lenovo G530 ( two functions keys mysteriously stopped working ) .
The funny thing is I treated the laptops much better than the netbooks - go figure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anecdotal evidence based on practical experience: I dragged my Samsung NC20 all over Europe and obscure parts of Russia and before that I had a well travelled Samsung NC10 and abused the crap out of it and they are both working just fine.
These units went through customs time after time, banged around, exposed to -10c temperatures, countless flights, and copious exposure to the funky Soviet Era power wiring with no ill effects!
I had much worse luck with my HP DV9000 laptop (something happened to the freaking hinge and the LCD would just cut out from time to time and reboot the system) and my Lenovo G530 (two functions keys mysteriously stopped working).
The funny thing is I treated the laptops much better than the netbooks - go figure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175538</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>sconeu</author>
	<datestamp>1258748760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux = cheap (dollar-wise).<br>Windows = expensive (dollar-wise).</p><p>Pick one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux = cheap ( dollar-wise ) .Windows = expensive ( dollar-wise ) .Pick one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux = cheap (dollar-wise).Windows = expensive (dollar-wise).Pick one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178948</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1258717680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually IIRC most OEMs are only paying between $5-8 dollars for XP on Netbooks, and last I heard it was something like $15 for Windows 7 Starter. Big whoop. So you can't really compare retail Windows price to what the OEMs pay. I also got to give MSFT credit where credit is due, the family pack was a smart move. Letting everyone switch their PCs over to Win7 for $50 a pop was a smart move IMHO and is sure to help push adoption of the new OS.</p><p>That said, if I was giving someone a netbook and knew it would ONLY be used as a "browser in a box" I would go with Linux, so I wouldn't have to slow down their machine with AV The problem comes when they get it home and try to plug it into their cheap ass inkjet or webcam, which is why I would tell them to just transfer files by USB and use it strictly as a browser in a box. There is still too much cheap ass hardware being sold at Walmart that Linux doesn't support for me to recommend it to the non-geeks out there, and I have NO desire to be their admin for free for life. </p><p>

So browser in a box=Linux, wants to plug in their shitty peripherals=XP or Win7.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually IIRC most OEMs are only paying between $ 5-8 dollars for XP on Netbooks , and last I heard it was something like $ 15 for Windows 7 Starter .
Big whoop .
So you ca n't really compare retail Windows price to what the OEMs pay .
I also got to give MSFT credit where credit is due , the family pack was a smart move .
Letting everyone switch their PCs over to Win7 for $ 50 a pop was a smart move IMHO and is sure to help push adoption of the new OS.That said , if I was giving someone a netbook and knew it would ONLY be used as a " browser in a box " I would go with Linux , so I would n't have to slow down their machine with AV The problem comes when they get it home and try to plug it into their cheap ass inkjet or webcam , which is why I would tell them to just transfer files by USB and use it strictly as a browser in a box .
There is still too much cheap ass hardware being sold at Walmart that Linux does n't support for me to recommend it to the non-geeks out there , and I have NO desire to be their admin for free for life .
So browser in a box = Linux , wants to plug in their shitty peripherals = XP or Win7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually IIRC most OEMs are only paying between $5-8 dollars for XP on Netbooks, and last I heard it was something like $15 for Windows 7 Starter.
Big whoop.
So you can't really compare retail Windows price to what the OEMs pay.
I also got to give MSFT credit where credit is due, the family pack was a smart move.
Letting everyone switch their PCs over to Win7 for $50 a pop was a smart move IMHO and is sure to help push adoption of the new OS.That said, if I was giving someone a netbook and knew it would ONLY be used as a "browser in a box" I would go with Linux, so I wouldn't have to slow down their machine with AV The problem comes when they get it home and try to plug it into their cheap ass inkjet or webcam, which is why I would tell them to just transfer files by USB and use it strictly as a browser in a box.
There is still too much cheap ass hardware being sold at Walmart that Linux doesn't support for me to recommend it to the non-geeks out there, and I have NO desire to be their admin for free for life.
So browser in a box=Linux, wants to plug in their shitty peripherals=XP or Win7.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175432</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1258748520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey Einstein, they added the MagSafe adaptors specifically because the power cord kept snapping off at the mainboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey Einstein , they added the MagSafe adaptors specifically because the power cord kept snapping off at the mainboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey Einstein, they added the MagSafe adaptors specifically because the power cord kept snapping off at the mainboard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30182960</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised but it makes sense</title>
	<author>ignavus</author>
	<datestamp>1258799220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Besides, when the price is that low, people tend to start thinking of these netbooks as "disposable" and worry less about problems.</p></div><p>Besides, when the price is that low, <em>OEMs</em> tend to start thinking of these netbooks as "disposable" and worry less about problems.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides , when the price is that low , people tend to start thinking of these netbooks as " disposable " and worry less about problems.Besides , when the price is that low , OEMs tend to start thinking of these netbooks as " disposable " and worry less about problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides, when the price is that low, people tend to start thinking of these netbooks as "disposable" and worry less about problems.Besides, when the price is that low, OEMs tend to start thinking of these netbooks as "disposable" and worry less about problems.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174912</id>
	<title>new computers suck, generally</title>
	<author>onefriedrice</author>
	<datestamp>1258746840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They just don't make them like they used it.  I'm sure most of us still have beige computers from the early nineties that are still crunching while the shiny computers they make today will die after a few years, if not sooner.  I believe the common assumption that Apple computers last longer should also be questioned; I haven't seen much evidence to say that they do.  Macs do retain their resale value better than commodity stuff, but that doesn't matter so much if what you're trying to sell doesn't work; it will always be worth a lot less.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They just do n't make them like they used it .
I 'm sure most of us still have beige computers from the early nineties that are still crunching while the shiny computers they make today will die after a few years , if not sooner .
I believe the common assumption that Apple computers last longer should also be questioned ; I have n't seen much evidence to say that they do .
Macs do retain their resale value better than commodity stuff , but that does n't matter so much if what you 're trying to sell does n't work ; it will always be worth a lot less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They just don't make them like they used it.
I'm sure most of us still have beige computers from the early nineties that are still crunching while the shiny computers they make today will die after a few years, if not sooner.
I believe the common assumption that Apple computers last longer should also be questioned; I haven't seen much evidence to say that they do.
Macs do retain their resale value better than commodity stuff, but that doesn't matter so much if what you're trying to sell doesn't work; it will always be worth a lot less.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176006</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>element-o.p.</author>
	<datestamp>1258750560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Despite the sensationalist headline (this is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., after all), I thought a 1\% failure rate between laptops and netbooks was pretty trivial.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Despite the sensationalist headline ( this is /. , after all ) , I thought a 1 \ % failure rate between laptops and netbooks was pretty trivial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Despite the sensationalist headline (this is /., after all), I thought a 1\% failure rate between laptops and netbooks was pretty trivial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175138</id>
	<title>Re:Netbooks get handled a lot rougher . . .</title>
	<author>LarrySDonald</author>
	<datestamp>1258747560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This was my first thought as well. They're also big with teens, a market group where I could easily see the non-techies accidentally breaking a cockpit voice recorder (I don't know how dad! I was just putting it on my bedstand and it broke! GAWD!). Sure, tech has gotten flimsier since the bulletproofs of yesteryear but people take their tech much more for granted as well, not giving the TLC we used to show it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This was my first thought as well .
They 're also big with teens , a market group where I could easily see the non-techies accidentally breaking a cockpit voice recorder ( I do n't know how dad !
I was just putting it on my bedstand and it broke !
GAWD ! ) . Sure , tech has gotten flimsier since the bulletproofs of yesteryear but people take their tech much more for granted as well , not giving the TLC we used to show it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was my first thought as well.
They're also big with teens, a market group where I could easily see the non-techies accidentally breaking a cockpit voice recorder (I don't know how dad!
I was just putting it on my bedstand and it broke!
GAWD!). Sure, tech has gotten flimsier since the bulletproofs of yesteryear but people take their tech much more for granted as well, not giving the TLC we used to show it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30187360</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258795200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you even read the entire summary, for god's sake?</p><p>You missed the part where they said that Apple notebooks had a 10 point higher return rate than PC's (Asus)...of course, I'm assuming that Apple's hardware is more expensive...because...well, it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you even read the entire summary , for god 's sake ? You missed the part where they said that Apple notebooks had a 10 point higher return rate than PC 's ( Asus ) ...of course , I 'm assuming that Apple 's hardware is more expensive...because...well , it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you even read the entire summary, for god's sake?You missed the part where they said that Apple notebooks had a 10 point higher return rate than PC's (Asus)...of course, I'm assuming that Apple's hardware is more expensive...because...well, it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181046</id>
	<title>Re:Nvidia?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258729440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mod-up - this comment is dead-on.</p><p>There were a whole *generation* of laptops from numerous vendors, including Apple, that we're wiped out by this <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/03/nvidia\_forecast\_glitch/" title="theregister.co.uk" rel="nofollow">NVIDIA chip problem</a> [theregister.co.uk]. In my company alone, we had 4 MacBook Pros with these chips and they have all died from the the NVIDIA chip failure within 2 years.</p><p>I'm sure there are other similar common component problems that we never hear about that represent a significant number of failures. After all, most/all of these vendors are using the same components. It would be really interesting to see a matrix of laptop failures traced back to the actual failure type/component vendor and model.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod-up - this comment is dead-on.There were a whole * generation * of laptops from numerous vendors , including Apple , that we 're wiped out by this NVIDIA chip problem [ theregister.co.uk ] .
In my company alone , we had 4 MacBook Pros with these chips and they have all died from the the NVIDIA chip failure within 2 years.I 'm sure there are other similar common component problems that we never hear about that represent a significant number of failures .
After all , most/all of these vendors are using the same components .
It would be really interesting to see a matrix of laptop failures traced back to the actual failure type/component vendor and model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod-up - this comment is dead-on.There were a whole *generation* of laptops from numerous vendors, including Apple, that we're wiped out by this NVIDIA chip problem [theregister.co.uk].
In my company alone, we had 4 MacBook Pros with these chips and they have all died from the the NVIDIA chip failure within 2 years.I'm sure there are other similar common component problems that we never hear about that represent a significant number of failures.
After all, most/all of these vendors are using the same components.
It would be really interesting to see a matrix of laptop failures traced back to the actual failure type/component vendor and model.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30179256</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258719180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, given their size and portability, I'd expect netbooks to have harsher treatment than a laptop.</p></div><p>Netbooks also weigh less than half as much as typical laptops.  Less weight = less inertia = greater accelerations upon the hard disk.  I bet if they compared netbook models with SSD vs regular hard drives, the difference would become obvious.  And I would bet that fully solid-state netbooks have dramatically higher reliability. (ie. those with SSD and fanless)  There's really not that much left that can go wrong, save bad solder connections or being dropped.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , given their size and portability , I 'd expect netbooks to have harsher treatment than a laptop.Netbooks also weigh less than half as much as typical laptops .
Less weight = less inertia = greater accelerations upon the hard disk .
I bet if they compared netbook models with SSD vs regular hard drives , the difference would become obvious .
And I would bet that fully solid-state netbooks have dramatically higher reliability .
( ie. those with SSD and fanless ) There 's really not that much left that can go wrong , save bad solder connections or being dropped .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, given their size and portability, I'd expect netbooks to have harsher treatment than a laptop.Netbooks also weigh less than half as much as typical laptops.
Less weight = less inertia = greater accelerations upon the hard disk.
I bet if they compared netbook models with SSD vs regular hard drives, the difference would become obvious.
And I would bet that fully solid-state netbooks have dramatically higher reliability.
(ie. those with SSD and fanless)  There's really not that much left that can go wrong, save bad solder connections or being dropped.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175670</id>
	<title>apples to oranges?</title>
	<author>Taibhsear</author>
	<datestamp>1258749180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are they comparing all netbooks to all laptops? Is this a hardware failure rate or software/os failure rate? Are they comparing SSDs to HDDs? Price ranges? Are these "sent back for repair" rates or "actually needed repairs" rates? At least they did mention that netbooks are new to the field so at least some of it is understandable there. Whenever percentages and statistics get thrown around I get very leery about the interpretation of the results. Lies, damn lies, statistics, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are they comparing all netbooks to all laptops ?
Is this a hardware failure rate or software/os failure rate ?
Are they comparing SSDs to HDDs ?
Price ranges ?
Are these " sent back for repair " rates or " actually needed repairs " rates ?
At least they did mention that netbooks are new to the field so at least some of it is understandable there .
Whenever percentages and statistics get thrown around I get very leery about the interpretation of the results .
Lies , damn lies , statistics , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are they comparing all netbooks to all laptops?
Is this a hardware failure rate or software/os failure rate?
Are they comparing SSDs to HDDs?
Price ranges?
Are these "sent back for repair" rates or "actually needed repairs" rates?
At least they did mention that netbooks are new to the field so at least some of it is understandable there.
Whenever percentages and statistics get thrown around I get very leery about the interpretation of the results.
Lies, damn lies, statistics, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175530</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258748760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>lol@ HP,<br>i used to work in this POS company and i can testify, most of the products they sell now are CR4p.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>lol @ HP,i used to work in this POS company and i can testify , most of the products they sell now are CR4p.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lol@ HP,i used to work in this POS company and i can testify, most of the products they sell now are CR4p.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175010</id>
	<title>Failure rate? What about Support of failures?</title>
	<author>Azureflare</author>
	<datestamp>1258747200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Failure rates are within 2-3 percentage points. Who cares. What really makes a difference is the SUPPORT you get from a vendor, not what percentage of the shipments fail over time.
<br> <br>
Hardware fails. Especially portable hardware. It's a fact of life, and engineering builds that in.  It's impossible to build a machine completely immune to failure without spending astronomical amounts of money. And it's also not reasonable.<br> <br>
What makes Apple an attractive vendor is Apple Care. You get your circuitboard replaced for $0 that normally cost a thousand dollars. Hard disk failure? $0 replacement. Optical disk drive failure? $0 replacement.<br> <br>
Dell and other vendors have similar programs. In the end, you cannot look at pure failure rates because failure rates are part of the design of hardware. You also need to consider support costs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Failure rates are within 2-3 percentage points .
Who cares .
What really makes a difference is the SUPPORT you get from a vendor , not what percentage of the shipments fail over time .
Hardware fails .
Especially portable hardware .
It 's a fact of life , and engineering builds that in .
It 's impossible to build a machine completely immune to failure without spending astronomical amounts of money .
And it 's also not reasonable .
What makes Apple an attractive vendor is Apple Care .
You get your circuitboard replaced for $ 0 that normally cost a thousand dollars .
Hard disk failure ?
$ 0 replacement .
Optical disk drive failure ?
$ 0 replacement .
Dell and other vendors have similar programs .
In the end , you can not look at pure failure rates because failure rates are part of the design of hardware .
You also need to consider support costs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Failure rates are within 2-3 percentage points.
Who cares.
What really makes a difference is the SUPPORT you get from a vendor, not what percentage of the shipments fail over time.
Hardware fails.
Especially portable hardware.
It's a fact of life, and engineering builds that in.
It's impossible to build a machine completely immune to failure without spending astronomical amounts of money.
And it's also not reasonable.
What makes Apple an attractive vendor is Apple Care.
You get your circuitboard replaced for $0 that normally cost a thousand dollars.
Hard disk failure?
$0 replacement.
Optical disk drive failure?
$0 replacement.
Dell and other vendors have similar programs.
In the end, you cannot look at pure failure rates because failure rates are part of the design of hardware.
You also need to consider support costs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175888</id>
	<title>Moral Hazard?</title>
	<author>jeffmeden</author>
	<datestamp>1258749960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this survey actually look at the failure of each unit across the board or just those units that have had a SquareTrade warranty purchased?  And, following that line of thought, are those that paid extra for a third party warranty more likely to abuse their hardware knowing that they will have a free replacement on the way if something breaks?  And finally, does this sampling error completely invalidate the thesis of their study?</p><p>If you are going to reply with "you can still assume the failure rate is higher for one vs. the other" please don't.  If the sample is so blatantly biased, any number of other factors might be involved.  For example, psychologically there may be little hesitation for someone to say "why not balance a jug of water on my head whilst I type on my $300 netbook, it's warrantied" whereas they would be less likely to do so when using a $3000 laptop, regardless of the warranty they have on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this survey actually look at the failure of each unit across the board or just those units that have had a SquareTrade warranty purchased ?
And , following that line of thought , are those that paid extra for a third party warranty more likely to abuse their hardware knowing that they will have a free replacement on the way if something breaks ?
And finally , does this sampling error completely invalidate the thesis of their study ? If you are going to reply with " you can still assume the failure rate is higher for one vs. the other " please do n't .
If the sample is so blatantly biased , any number of other factors might be involved .
For example , psychologically there may be little hesitation for someone to say " why not balance a jug of water on my head whilst I type on my $ 300 netbook , it 's warrantied " whereas they would be less likely to do so when using a $ 3000 laptop , regardless of the warranty they have on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this survey actually look at the failure of each unit across the board or just those units that have had a SquareTrade warranty purchased?
And, following that line of thought, are those that paid extra for a third party warranty more likely to abuse their hardware knowing that they will have a free replacement on the way if something breaks?
And finally, does this sampling error completely invalidate the thesis of their study?If you are going to reply with "you can still assume the failure rate is higher for one vs. the other" please don't.
If the sample is so blatantly biased, any number of other factors might be involved.
For example, psychologically there may be little hesitation for someone to say "why not balance a jug of water on my head whilst I type on my $300 netbook, it's warrantied" whereas they would be less likely to do so when using a $3000 laptop, regardless of the warranty they have on it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177248</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1258711620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to mention the difference is a whopping 1.1\%</p><p>OMG! Something that costs 300$ is 1.1\% more likely to fail that something that cost 900$!</p><p>AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!    BLAM!  Head 'slosion...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to mention the difference is a whopping 1.1 \ % OMG !
Something that costs 300 $ is 1.1 \ % more likely to fail that something that cost 900 $ ! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !
BLAM ! Head 'slosion.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to mention the difference is a whopping 1.1\%OMG!
Something that costs 300$ is 1.1\% more likely to fail that something that cost 900$!AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
BLAM!  Head 'slosion...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30183458</id>
	<title>Re:Correlation != Causality</title>
	<author>mister\_dave</author>
	<datestamp>1258808760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While we're swapping anecdotes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I took my MacBook in for warranty repairs when the DVD player failed, and the case top / palm rest cracked.</p><p>My willingness to complain was raised because the thing cost me &pound;700, and was less than two years old. I'm not impressed by the build quality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While we 're swapping anecdotes ... I took my MacBook in for warranty repairs when the DVD player failed , and the case top / palm rest cracked.My willingness to complain was raised because the thing cost me   700 , and was less than two years old .
I 'm not impressed by the build quality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While we're swapping anecdotes ... I took my MacBook in for warranty repairs when the DVD player failed, and the case top / palm rest cracked.My willingness to complain was raised because the thing cost me £700, and was less than two years old.
I'm not impressed by the build quality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177578</id>
	<title>Make sense.</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1258712640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Netbooks are marketed as something you just throw in your purse or backpack and whip out when you need it.</p><p>I bet they get a lot of abuse, and users cry about how it didn't last too long being tossed into the messenger bag and being sat on while busing back and forth across campus.</p><p>I'm surprised they last as well as they do.  A 25\%+ failure rate over 3 years is pretty good.  I would expect that to be an annual failure rate.  People treat their portable PCs like crap.</p><p>When I sold maintenance agreements on notebooks, I billed them a 75\% premium if they didn't let me see it at least once in 12 months.  Tightening up the hinges and covers and cleaning out the fan adds years to the life of many notebooks.  I didn't take Thinkpads under maintenance cause I advised my clients they were tougher than that.  I didn't take Dell machines cause they just don't support them.  No parts.  HP/Compaq were not my favorites, though they work.  Toshiba I avoid, Acer I actually like.  I have an Acer 1846 that is still going, though I just put in my third DC power jack.  At least I can solder that board without it crinkling up like a piece of tissue paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Netbooks are marketed as something you just throw in your purse or backpack and whip out when you need it.I bet they get a lot of abuse , and users cry about how it did n't last too long being tossed into the messenger bag and being sat on while busing back and forth across campus.I 'm surprised they last as well as they do .
A 25 \ % + failure rate over 3 years is pretty good .
I would expect that to be an annual failure rate .
People treat their portable PCs like crap.When I sold maintenance agreements on notebooks , I billed them a 75 \ % premium if they did n't let me see it at least once in 12 months .
Tightening up the hinges and covers and cleaning out the fan adds years to the life of many notebooks .
I did n't take Thinkpads under maintenance cause I advised my clients they were tougher than that .
I did n't take Dell machines cause they just do n't support them .
No parts .
HP/Compaq were not my favorites , though they work .
Toshiba I avoid , Acer I actually like .
I have an Acer 1846 that is still going , though I just put in my third DC power jack .
At least I can solder that board without it crinkling up like a piece of tissue paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Netbooks are marketed as something you just throw in your purse or backpack and whip out when you need it.I bet they get a lot of abuse, and users cry about how it didn't last too long being tossed into the messenger bag and being sat on while busing back and forth across campus.I'm surprised they last as well as they do.
A 25\%+ failure rate over 3 years is pretty good.
I would expect that to be an annual failure rate.
People treat their portable PCs like crap.When I sold maintenance agreements on notebooks, I billed them a 75\% premium if they didn't let me see it at least once in 12 months.
Tightening up the hinges and covers and cleaning out the fan adds years to the life of many notebooks.
I didn't take Thinkpads under maintenance cause I advised my clients they were tougher than that.
I didn't take Dell machines cause they just don't support them.
No parts.
HP/Compaq were not my favorites, though they work.
Toshiba I avoid, Acer I actually like.
I have an Acer 1846 that is still going, though I just put in my third DC power jack.
At least I can solder that board without it crinkling up like a piece of tissue paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174684</id>
	<title>Surprised but it makes sense</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1258746060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After all, one of the things driving interest in NetBooks is their price.  For makers to make money on them, they have to make them using lesser standards than their more expensive units.  After all, a great deal of the same stuff goes into each and to keep the prices down, something had to give.</p><p>Besides, when the price is that low, people tend to start thinking of these netbooks as "disposable" and worry less about problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After all , one of the things driving interest in NetBooks is their price .
For makers to make money on them , they have to make them using lesser standards than their more expensive units .
After all , a great deal of the same stuff goes into each and to keep the prices down , something had to give.Besides , when the price is that low , people tend to start thinking of these netbooks as " disposable " and worry less about problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After all, one of the things driving interest in NetBooks is their price.
For makers to make money on them, they have to make them using lesser standards than their more expensive units.
After all, a great deal of the same stuff goes into each and to keep the prices down, something had to give.Besides, when the price is that low, people tend to start thinking of these netbooks as "disposable" and worry less about problems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30180168</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>malv</author>
	<datestamp>1258723680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The netbook is cheaper and it still has a lower cost * failure rate than a notebook. I should care more if my $2000 Macbook is going to only last 2 years than if my $300 netbook will only last 1.5.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The netbook is cheaper and it still has a lower cost * failure rate than a notebook .
I should care more if my $ 2000 Macbook is going to only last 2 years than if my $ 300 netbook will only last 1.5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The netbook is cheaper and it still has a lower cost * failure rate than a notebook.
I should care more if my $2000 Macbook is going to only last 2 years than if my $300 netbook will only last 1.5.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175976</id>
	<title>magsafe is reliable?</title>
	<author>SuperBanana</author>
	<datestamp>1258750320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Mac laptops don't have "power plugs" attached to their mainboard-- they all use MagSafe adapters which suffer extremely little wear and tear.</i></p><p>Right, except for the magsafe pin springs breaking, the magsafe cord fraying/breaking off the connector because of cheap strain relief (since fixed).</p><p>I find it funny that everyone is making a big hooplah between 1-in-4 and 1-in-5 failure rate differences.  Either way, folks, those stats SUCK.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac laptops do n't have " power plugs " attached to their mainboard-- they all use MagSafe adapters which suffer extremely little wear and tear.Right , except for the magsafe pin springs breaking , the magsafe cord fraying/breaking off the connector because of cheap strain relief ( since fixed ) .I find it funny that everyone is making a big hooplah between 1-in-4 and 1-in-5 failure rate differences .
Either way , folks , those stats SUCK .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Mac laptops don't have "power plugs" attached to their mainboard-- they all use MagSafe adapters which suffer extremely little wear and tear.Right, except for the magsafe pin springs breaking, the magsafe cord fraying/breaking off the connector because of cheap strain relief (since fixed).I find it funny that everyone is making a big hooplah between 1-in-4 and 1-in-5 failure rate differences.
Either way, folks, those stats SUCK.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176796</id>
	<title>It's because netbooks have changed</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1258710240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My EEE has been rock solid and my co-worker dropped down a set of concrete stairs and it survived. Mine is a 901 and his is even older.
<br> <br>
I think old netbooks were more durable. They had no hard drive and they were fairly minimal. Now netbooks are just little laptops and often with a hard drive. It's not really a netbook anymore but a little laptop with all the same laptop problems and put in a smaller space so they're  likely more susceptible to heat problems.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My EEE has been rock solid and my co-worker dropped down a set of concrete stairs and it survived .
Mine is a 901 and his is even older .
I think old netbooks were more durable .
They had no hard drive and they were fairly minimal .
Now netbooks are just little laptops and often with a hard drive .
It 's not really a netbook anymore but a little laptop with all the same laptop problems and put in a smaller space so they 're likely more susceptible to heat problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My EEE has been rock solid and my co-worker dropped down a set of concrete stairs and it survived.
Mine is a 901 and his is even older.
I think old netbooks were more durable.
They had no hard drive and they were fairly minimal.
Now netbooks are just little laptops and often with a hard drive.
It's not really a netbook anymore but a little laptop with all the same laptop problems and put in a smaller space so they're  likely more susceptible to heat problems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176634</id>
	<title>Re:Netbooks get handled a lot rougher . . .</title>
	<author>breadstic</author>
	<datestamp>1258709700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly, I would never have brought a $1000+ laptop travelling with me... but my $400 netbook still seems to be running after 4 months in central america, despite being roughly thrown about inside my travelling backpack strapped to the top of buses, taken to the beach, survived tropical storms, etc...</p><p>I think I would have had much more trouble keeping a bigger laptop running under the same conditions. In my experience, the most strenuous journey $1000 laptops make is between the desk at home and the desk at work/university.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly , I would never have brought a $ 1000 + laptop travelling with me... but my $ 400 netbook still seems to be running after 4 months in central america , despite being roughly thrown about inside my travelling backpack strapped to the top of buses , taken to the beach , survived tropical storms , etc...I think I would have had much more trouble keeping a bigger laptop running under the same conditions .
In my experience , the most strenuous journey $ 1000 laptops make is between the desk at home and the desk at work/university .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly, I would never have brought a $1000+ laptop travelling with me... but my $400 netbook still seems to be running after 4 months in central america, despite being roughly thrown about inside my travelling backpack strapped to the top of buses, taken to the beach, survived tropical storms, etc...I think I would have had much more trouble keeping a bigger laptop running under the same conditions.
In my experience, the most strenuous journey $1000 laptops make is between the desk at home and the desk at work/university.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176712</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>icannotthinkofaname</author>
	<datestamp>1258710000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>correlationisnotcausation</p><p>See: Mac failure rate over 3 years, according to TFS and TFA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>correlationisnotcausationSee : Mac failure rate over 3 years , according to TFS and TFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>correlationisnotcausationSee: Mac failure rate over 3 years, according to TFS and TFA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174816</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>v1</author>
	<datestamp>1258746480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure everyone's going to "fanboi" label me for this comment but here it is anyway.  Apple tends to hang more on the bleeding edge, and is naturally going to run into more frequent hardware failures as a result.  Things like mandatory cameras, backlit keyboards, ambient light sensors, 11N, drop-head-parking, DVI, etc.  I suppose in that respect a lot of Apple buyers are comparable to other brands' "early adopters", and the tradeoffs that brings.</p><p>What's more important to most people is the <i>support</i> they get when they have a problem. (and then the tables turn, violently)</p><p>(I'd rather have my mobo go out twice and be covered both times, than for it to go out once and <b>not</b> be covered)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure everyone 's going to " fanboi " label me for this comment but here it is anyway .
Apple tends to hang more on the bleeding edge , and is naturally going to run into more frequent hardware failures as a result .
Things like mandatory cameras , backlit keyboards , ambient light sensors , 11N , drop-head-parking , DVI , etc .
I suppose in that respect a lot of Apple buyers are comparable to other brands ' " early adopters " , and the tradeoffs that brings.What 's more important to most people is the support they get when they have a problem .
( and then the tables turn , violently ) ( I 'd rather have my mobo go out twice and be covered both times , than for it to go out once and not be covered )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure everyone's going to "fanboi" label me for this comment but here it is anyway.
Apple tends to hang more on the bleeding edge, and is naturally going to run into more frequent hardware failures as a result.
Things like mandatory cameras, backlit keyboards, ambient light sensors, 11N, drop-head-parking, DVI, etc.
I suppose in that respect a lot of Apple buyers are comparable to other brands' "early adopters", and the tradeoffs that brings.What's more important to most people is the support they get when they have a problem.
(and then the tables turn, violently)(I'd rather have my mobo go out twice and be covered both times, than for it to go out once and not be covered)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175244</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258747860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe it's because Netbook motherboards have holes... <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MSI\_Wind\_MB1.jpg" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MSI\_Wind\_MB1.jpg</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it 's because Netbook motherboards have holes... http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File : MSI \ _Wind \ _MB1.jpg [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it's because Netbook motherboards have holes... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MSI\_Wind\_MB1.jpg [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175562</id>
	<title>Re:While I have no doubt this is true...</title>
	<author>Macman408</author>
	<datestamp>1258748820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll defend them a bit - they say in their <a href="http://www.squaretrade.com/htm/pdf/SquareTrade\_laptop\_reliability\_1109.pdf" title="squaretrade.com">paper</a> [squaretrade.com] that they exclude computers that were purchased as either refurbished or used.</p><p>But that's where my defense of their methodology ends. They say the total sample size was 30,000, and they analyzed 9 brands that had over 1,000 units each. IMHO, that's still a pretty small sample size. The margin of error on at least some of those numbers would be around &#177;3\%; that would be enough for the "top 6" manufacturers to be roughly indistinguishable. Keeping that in mind, I'd say there are two groups of manufacturers, reliability-wise: Asus, Toshiba, Sony, Apple, and Dell are more reliable, and Lenovo, Acer, Gateway, and HP are less reliable - but only by a couple percent.</p><p>Also, I'd object similarly to their comparison of netbooks against the larger notebook market; they say in their paper that netbook market share was 10\% of all laptops until Q4 last year, so I have to assume that their 1-year data is probably similar, meaning 10\% of their 30,000 samples are netbooks. That means a margin of error around &#177;2\%. However, the difference between netbooks and "premium laptops" in reliability at 1 year is only 1.6\%.</p><p>Finally, I almost missed this, but all their 3-year reliability numbers for all laptops are "projections" from their 2-year data (their 3-year reliability numbers for netbooks are projected from just 1 year). So take any error they had at 2 years, multiply it by 3/2, and you're off even further - I suppose that means the margin of error on some of these numbers is probably closer to 4.5\%.</p><p>All in all, I'd say their paper is a little light on numbers. There are a whopping 11 actual data points that they base all of their data on in the paper - the other 13 data points are projections (all but 1 is a projection from data that is not quoted in the paper). Add to that my general sense of distrust in anybody that sells an extended warranty, and, well, you get the idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll defend them a bit - they say in their paper [ squaretrade.com ] that they exclude computers that were purchased as either refurbished or used.But that 's where my defense of their methodology ends .
They say the total sample size was 30,000 , and they analyzed 9 brands that had over 1,000 units each .
IMHO , that 's still a pretty small sample size .
The margin of error on at least some of those numbers would be around   3 \ % ; that would be enough for the " top 6 " manufacturers to be roughly indistinguishable .
Keeping that in mind , I 'd say there are two groups of manufacturers , reliability-wise : Asus , Toshiba , Sony , Apple , and Dell are more reliable , and Lenovo , Acer , Gateway , and HP are less reliable - but only by a couple percent.Also , I 'd object similarly to their comparison of netbooks against the larger notebook market ; they say in their paper that netbook market share was 10 \ % of all laptops until Q4 last year , so I have to assume that their 1-year data is probably similar , meaning 10 \ % of their 30,000 samples are netbooks .
That means a margin of error around   2 \ % .
However , the difference between netbooks and " premium laptops " in reliability at 1 year is only 1.6 \ % .Finally , I almost missed this , but all their 3-year reliability numbers for all laptops are " projections " from their 2-year data ( their 3-year reliability numbers for netbooks are projected from just 1 year ) .
So take any error they had at 2 years , multiply it by 3/2 , and you 're off even further - I suppose that means the margin of error on some of these numbers is probably closer to 4.5 \ % .All in all , I 'd say their paper is a little light on numbers .
There are a whopping 11 actual data points that they base all of their data on in the paper - the other 13 data points are projections ( all but 1 is a projection from data that is not quoted in the paper ) .
Add to that my general sense of distrust in anybody that sells an extended warranty , and , well , you get the idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll defend them a bit - they say in their paper [squaretrade.com] that they exclude computers that were purchased as either refurbished or used.But that's where my defense of their methodology ends.
They say the total sample size was 30,000, and they analyzed 9 brands that had over 1,000 units each.
IMHO, that's still a pretty small sample size.
The margin of error on at least some of those numbers would be around ±3\%; that would be enough for the "top 6" manufacturers to be roughly indistinguishable.
Keeping that in mind, I'd say there are two groups of manufacturers, reliability-wise: Asus, Toshiba, Sony, Apple, and Dell are more reliable, and Lenovo, Acer, Gateway, and HP are less reliable - but only by a couple percent.Also, I'd object similarly to their comparison of netbooks against the larger notebook market; they say in their paper that netbook market share was 10\% of all laptops until Q4 last year, so I have to assume that their 1-year data is probably similar, meaning 10\% of their 30,000 samples are netbooks.
That means a margin of error around ±2\%.
However, the difference between netbooks and "premium laptops" in reliability at 1 year is only 1.6\%.Finally, I almost missed this, but all their 3-year reliability numbers for all laptops are "projections" from their 2-year data (their 3-year reliability numbers for netbooks are projected from just 1 year).
So take any error they had at 2 years, multiply it by 3/2, and you're off even further - I suppose that means the margin of error on some of these numbers is probably closer to 4.5\%.All in all, I'd say their paper is a little light on numbers.
There are a whopping 11 actual data points that they base all of their data on in the paper - the other 13 data points are projections (all but 1 is a projection from data that is not quoted in the paper).
Add to that my general sense of distrust in anybody that sells an extended warranty, and, well, you get the idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177420</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>CFBMoo1</author>
	<datestamp>1258712160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder how many of those netbooks were SSD drive netbooks vs regular HD netbooks? Part of me thinks the regular HD netbooks would fail more because of moving parts banging around and the heat generated by said moving parts.<br><br>I'm going on a year almost now with my netbook and it's an SSD netbook (1000 40g EEE). Never really had heat problems with it and since there are no moving parts other then a fan it trucks right along. Course now watch it not fire up next time I start it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how many of those netbooks were SSD drive netbooks vs regular HD netbooks ?
Part of me thinks the regular HD netbooks would fail more because of moving parts banging around and the heat generated by said moving parts.I 'm going on a year almost now with my netbook and it 's an SSD netbook ( 1000 40g EEE ) .
Never really had heat problems with it and since there are no moving parts other then a fan it trucks right along .
Course now watch it not fire up next time I start it .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how many of those netbooks were SSD drive netbooks vs regular HD netbooks?
Part of me thinks the regular HD netbooks would fail more because of moving parts banging around and the heat generated by said moving parts.I'm going on a year almost now with my netbook and it's an SSD netbook (1000 40g EEE).
Never really had heat problems with it and since there are no moving parts other then a fan it trucks right along.
Course now watch it not fire up next time I start it.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178214</id>
	<title>Kids</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258714860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wasn't the original EeePC designed for school kids? I'll bet netbooks have a higher proportion of school-age owners than full laptops. If this is the case, they're going to get much rougher treatment and therefore a higher failure rate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't the original EeePC designed for school kids ?
I 'll bet netbooks have a higher proportion of school-age owners than full laptops .
If this is the case , they 're going to get much rougher treatment and therefore a higher failure rate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't the original EeePC designed for school kids?
I'll bet netbooks have a higher proportion of school-age owners than full laptops.
If this is the case, they're going to get much rougher treatment and therefore a higher failure rate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175162</id>
	<title>Re:Failure rate? What about Support of failures?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258747620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wrong. "Apple Care" is an insurance scheme much like any insurance - it is there to MAKE money for Apple. You may as well be praising your insurance company how great it is for paying for your house if it catches on fire due to faulty construction, or whatever. But it sure is not for free!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wrong .
" Apple Care " is an insurance scheme much like any insurance - it is there to MAKE money for Apple .
You may as well be praising your insurance company how great it is for paying for your house if it catches on fire due to faulty construction , or whatever .
But it sure is not for free !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wrong.
"Apple Care" is an insurance scheme much like any insurance - it is there to MAKE money for Apple.
You may as well be praising your insurance company how great it is for paying for your house if it catches on fire due to faulty construction, or whatever.
But it sure is not for free!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175254</id>
	<title>My track history</title>
	<author>British</author>
	<datestamp>1258747860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ASUS EEE PC - 7 inch 4 gig SSD model: Screen's flakey in less than a year. You have to sometimes bend &amp; twist the display, otherwise it shows just pure gray for an image.</p><p>Acer Aspire One: Windows died randomly on one occasion(reinstall fixed that). Bios died a few weeks ago, but took only 5 minutes to fix.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ASUS EEE PC - 7 inch 4 gig SSD model : Screen 's flakey in less than a year .
You have to sometimes bend &amp; twist the display , otherwise it shows just pure gray for an image.Acer Aspire One : Windows died randomly on one occasion ( reinstall fixed that ) .
Bios died a few weeks ago , but took only 5 minutes to fix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ASUS EEE PC - 7 inch 4 gig SSD model: Screen's flakey in less than a year.
You have to sometimes bend &amp; twist the display, otherwise it shows just pure gray for an image.Acer Aspire One: Windows died randomly on one occasion(reinstall fixed that).
Bios died a few weeks ago, but took only 5 minutes to fix.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175914</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1258750020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is the matter of the confounding variable:<br> <br> Are people rougher on things that are cheaper?</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is the matter of the confounding variable : Are people rougher on things that are cheaper ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is the matter of the confounding variable:  Are people rougher on things that are cheaper?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177522</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>jamescford</author>
	<datestamp>1258712460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I sort of agree. I think it's "legendary customer satisfaction" that TFA is thinking of (that's where Apple has always lead, anyway). If you have a Mac you may have the same lowish rate of problems (many of which are possibly component problems and not much to do with Apple), but statistically speaking you're more satisfied overall, which is probably driven by the large fraction *without* problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I sort of agree .
I think it 's " legendary customer satisfaction " that TFA is thinking of ( that 's where Apple has always lead , anyway ) .
If you have a Mac you may have the same lowish rate of problems ( many of which are possibly component problems and not much to do with Apple ) , but statistically speaking you 're more satisfied overall , which is probably driven by the large fraction * without * problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sort of agree.
I think it's "legendary customer satisfaction" that TFA is thinking of (that's where Apple has always lead, anyway).
If you have a Mac you may have the same lowish rate of problems (many of which are possibly component problems and not much to do with Apple), but statistically speaking you're more satisfied overall, which is probably driven by the large fraction *without* problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174590</id>
	<title>HP - more like HA</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1258745820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> HP was the worst of the nine PC vendors listed, with a malfunction rate of 25.6\% over three years</p></div><p>In order to malfunction it first must function, something HP's don't do very well, especially with all the nice bundled packages I have pre-installed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>HP was the worst of the nine PC vendors listed , with a malfunction rate of 25.6 \ % over three yearsIn order to malfunction it first must function , something HP 's do n't do very well , especially with all the nice bundled packages I have pre-installed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> HP was the worst of the nine PC vendors listed, with a malfunction rate of 25.6\% over three yearsIn order to malfunction it first must function, something HP's don't do very well, especially with all the nice bundled packages I have pre-installed.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174732</id>
	<title>Price and Care</title>
	<author>iron spartan</author>
	<datestamp>1258746240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It couldn't be because they are cheap and small that Netbooks are more likely to get abused than their high dollar counterparts?</p><p>I know that I don't take near as good of care of my $300 netbook as I do of my $2000 laptop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It could n't be because they are cheap and small that Netbooks are more likely to get abused than their high dollar counterparts ? I know that I do n't take near as good of care of my $ 300 netbook as I do of my $ 2000 laptop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It couldn't be because they are cheap and small that Netbooks are more likely to get abused than their high dollar counterparts?I know that I don't take near as good of care of my $300 netbook as I do of my $2000 laptop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175016</id>
	<title>Re:Jive with anyone else's experience.</title>
	<author>BetterSense</author>
	<datestamp>1258747200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Plus, it's not a drastic difference. 4-some percent versus 5-some percent. Personally, I think 4 and 5 percent is high failure rates for an flavor of laptop...so we're talking netbooks have a very very high failure rate compared to the 'merely' very high failure rate of normal laptops.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus , it 's not a drastic difference .
4-some percent versus 5-some percent .
Personally , I think 4 and 5 percent is high failure rates for an flavor of laptop...so we 're talking netbooks have a very very high failure rate compared to the 'merely ' very high failure rate of normal laptops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus, it's not a drastic difference.
4-some percent versus 5-some percent.
Personally, I think 4 and 5 percent is high failure rates for an flavor of laptop...so we're talking netbooks have a very very high failure rate compared to the 'merely' very high failure rate of normal laptops.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</id>
	<title>Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>ddrueding80</author>
	<datestamp>1258745700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you're telling me that something cheap isn't as well made as something expensive? Allow me to go re-evaluate my life...</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're telling me that something cheap is n't as well made as something expensive ?
Allow me to go re-evaluate my life.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're telling me that something cheap isn't as well made as something expensive?
Allow me to go re-evaluate my life...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175776</id>
	<title>nVidia at fault?</title>
	<author>ACMENEWSLLC</author>
	<datestamp>1258749600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many notebooks had failures related to faulty nVidia chips, including Mac's.   I wonder if that is inflating these stats?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many notebooks had failures related to faulty nVidia chips , including Mac 's .
I wonder if that is inflating these stats ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many notebooks had failures related to faulty nVidia chips, including Mac's.
I wonder if that is inflating these stats?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175196</id>
	<title>Asus Netbooks</title>
	<author>No. 24601</author>
	<datestamp>1258747740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So how do Asus Netbooks fair, then ?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So how do Asus Netbooks fair , then ?
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So how do Asus Netbooks fair, then ?
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176500</id>
	<title>Mac reliability</title>
	<author>TheGreatOrangePeel</author>
	<datestamp>1258709160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>research also raises question marks over the legendary reliability of Macs</p></div></blockquote><p>

My University leased laptops to all the students. The art majors made a stink about IBM lappies and the second or third year into the program, they began leasing Macs to art majors<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... long story short: the Macs had a higher DOA rate than the IBM lappies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>research also raises question marks over the legendary reliability of Macs My University leased laptops to all the students .
The art majors made a stink about IBM lappies and the second or third year into the program , they began leasing Macs to art majors ... long story short : the Macs had a higher DOA rate than the IBM lappies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>research also raises question marks over the legendary reliability of Macs

My University leased laptops to all the students.
The art majors made a stink about IBM lappies and the second or third year into the program, they began leasing Macs to art majors ... long story short: the Macs had a higher DOA rate than the IBM lappies.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175600</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>piltdownman84</author>
	<datestamp>1258749000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also because of their size people have a tendency to transport them in a bag that is less supported. Most people carry their Laptop in a proper bag or a Targus backpack, where as its not uncommon to see someone carrying their netbook in their purse or messenger bag.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also because of their size people have a tendency to transport them in a bag that is less supported .
Most people carry their Laptop in a proper bag or a Targus backpack , where as its not uncommon to see someone carrying their netbook in their purse or messenger bag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also because of their size people have a tendency to transport them in a bag that is less supported.
Most people carry their Laptop in a proper bag or a Targus backpack, where as its not uncommon to see someone carrying their netbook in their purse or messenger bag.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30182396</id>
	<title>Re:While I have no doubt this is true...</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1258745160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But that's where my defense of their methodology ends. They say the total sample size was 30,000, and they analyzed 9 brands that had over 1,000 units each. IMHO, that's still a pretty small sample size. The margin of error on at least some of those numbers would be around &#177;3\%; that would be enough for the "top 6" manufacturers to be roughly indistinguishable.</p></div><p>Which will still be better than the anecdotal evidence based on personal experience or a single IT service representative, which is what the rest of this post will have. Also you have a selection problem, because it's unlikely that they were put to the same use. Imagine in a corporation you have two kinds of laptops, a "toughbook" for road warriors and a "fragilebook" for people mostly sitting at their desk. The "toughbook" could have a higher failure rate, and yet be a lot more durable product and replacing them with "fragilebooks" would be a disaster. And a simple price bias, if you sold the same laptop at 300$ and 500$ the people who spent 500$ would probably treat it nicer because it was more expensive, then on the other hand they could be less tolerant of faults. There's lots of potential data issues. That said, even knowing they're around the same reliability is valuable information in itself, then you can look at all other qualities to decide without worrying too much.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But that 's where my defense of their methodology ends .
They say the total sample size was 30,000 , and they analyzed 9 brands that had over 1,000 units each .
IMHO , that 's still a pretty small sample size .
The margin of error on at least some of those numbers would be around   3 \ % ; that would be enough for the " top 6 " manufacturers to be roughly indistinguishable.Which will still be better than the anecdotal evidence based on personal experience or a single IT service representative , which is what the rest of this post will have .
Also you have a selection problem , because it 's unlikely that they were put to the same use .
Imagine in a corporation you have two kinds of laptops , a " toughbook " for road warriors and a " fragilebook " for people mostly sitting at their desk .
The " toughbook " could have a higher failure rate , and yet be a lot more durable product and replacing them with " fragilebooks " would be a disaster .
And a simple price bias , if you sold the same laptop at 300 $ and 500 $ the people who spent 500 $ would probably treat it nicer because it was more expensive , then on the other hand they could be less tolerant of faults .
There 's lots of potential data issues .
That said , even knowing they 're around the same reliability is valuable information in itself , then you can look at all other qualities to decide without worrying too much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But that's where my defense of their methodology ends.
They say the total sample size was 30,000, and they analyzed 9 brands that had over 1,000 units each.
IMHO, that's still a pretty small sample size.
The margin of error on at least some of those numbers would be around ±3\%; that would be enough for the "top 6" manufacturers to be roughly indistinguishable.Which will still be better than the anecdotal evidence based on personal experience or a single IT service representative, which is what the rest of this post will have.
Also you have a selection problem, because it's unlikely that they were put to the same use.
Imagine in a corporation you have two kinds of laptops, a "toughbook" for road warriors and a "fragilebook" for people mostly sitting at their desk.
The "toughbook" could have a higher failure rate, and yet be a lot more durable product and replacing them with "fragilebooks" would be a disaster.
And a simple price bias, if you sold the same laptop at 300$ and 500$ the people who spent 500$ would probably treat it nicer because it was more expensive, then on the other hand they could be less tolerant of faults.
There's lots of potential data issues.
That said, even knowing they're around the same reliability is valuable information in itself, then you can look at all other qualities to decide without worrying too much.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181316</id>
	<title>Re:Nvidia?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258731900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Toshiba shifted from Nvidia to ATI a couple of generations ago, but previous to this the failure rate on the Nvidia GPU was astronomical. As a seller/repair agent we saw over 50\% of the Nvidia fitted Toshibas returned on a sample size of close to 400 units sold.</p><p>The Asus hardware was generally pretty reliable and good value for money, but the chasis build was poor, particularly on hinges.</p><p>The Mac's with 8600 series GPU would be in this sample from Square Trade, which would probably damage their figures somewhat.</p><p>On a positive note for Mac, most of the returns for repair were actually software issues for the windows machines, with customers not understanding that killing their Windows install with viruses or spyware wasn't actually going to be covered by their "hardware warranty". You could argue that by purchasing a Mac, that customers may be less likely to have to return their machine.</p><p>Finally, extended warranty should be considered in purchase price. Asus have 2 years as standard, Toshiba have 1 year but an extra 2 years is only $169RRP AU, while Apple have 1 year with Applecare and 2 more years hardware warranty at least $229 on the cheaper machines and more on the Pros.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Toshiba shifted from Nvidia to ATI a couple of generations ago , but previous to this the failure rate on the Nvidia GPU was astronomical .
As a seller/repair agent we saw over 50 \ % of the Nvidia fitted Toshibas returned on a sample size of close to 400 units sold.The Asus hardware was generally pretty reliable and good value for money , but the chasis build was poor , particularly on hinges.The Mac 's with 8600 series GPU would be in this sample from Square Trade , which would probably damage their figures somewhat.On a positive note for Mac , most of the returns for repair were actually software issues for the windows machines , with customers not understanding that killing their Windows install with viruses or spyware was n't actually going to be covered by their " hardware warranty " .
You could argue that by purchasing a Mac , that customers may be less likely to have to return their machine.Finally , extended warranty should be considered in purchase price .
Asus have 2 years as standard , Toshiba have 1 year but an extra 2 years is only $ 169RRP AU , while Apple have 1 year with Applecare and 2 more years hardware warranty at least $ 229 on the cheaper machines and more on the Pros .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Toshiba shifted from Nvidia to ATI a couple of generations ago, but previous to this the failure rate on the Nvidia GPU was astronomical.
As a seller/repair agent we saw over 50\% of the Nvidia fitted Toshibas returned on a sample size of close to 400 units sold.The Asus hardware was generally pretty reliable and good value for money, but the chasis build was poor, particularly on hinges.The Mac's with 8600 series GPU would be in this sample from Square Trade, which would probably damage their figures somewhat.On a positive note for Mac, most of the returns for repair were actually software issues for the windows machines, with customers not understanding that killing their Windows install with viruses or spyware wasn't actually going to be covered by their "hardware warranty".
You could argue that by purchasing a Mac, that customers may be less likely to have to return their machine.Finally, extended warranty should be considered in purchase price.
Asus have 2 years as standard, Toshiba have 1 year but an extra 2 years is only $169RRP AU, while Apple have 1 year with Applecare and 2 more years hardware warranty at least $229 on the cheaper machines and more on the Pros.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174670</id>
	<title>MISPWOSO</title>
	<author>twofishy</author>
	<datestamp>1258746060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What is this?  A report from the Maximegalon Institute of Slowly and Painfully Working Out the Surprisingly Obvious?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is this ?
A report from the Maximegalon Institute of Slowly and Painfully Working Out the Surprisingly Obvious ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is this?
A report from the Maximegalon Institute of Slowly and Painfully Working Out the Surprisingly Obvious?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175222</id>
	<title>Re:Failure rate? What about Support of failures?</title>
	<author>arb phd slp</author>
	<datestamp>1258747800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What makes Apple an attractive vendor is Apple Care. You get your circuitboard replaced for $0 that normally cost a thousand dollars. Hard disk failure? $0 replacement. Optical disk drive failure? $0 replacement.</p></div><p>Given that, how many Macs are covered by SquareTrade warrantys instead of Apple's? Their data may be skewed by selection bias (but I can't say which way).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What makes Apple an attractive vendor is Apple Care .
You get your circuitboard replaced for $ 0 that normally cost a thousand dollars .
Hard disk failure ?
$ 0 replacement .
Optical disk drive failure ?
$ 0 replacement.Given that , how many Macs are covered by SquareTrade warrantys instead of Apple 's ?
Their data may be skewed by selection bias ( but I ca n't say which way ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What makes Apple an attractive vendor is Apple Care.
You get your circuitboard replaced for $0 that normally cost a thousand dollars.
Hard disk failure?
$0 replacement.
Optical disk drive failure?
$0 replacement.Given that, how many Macs are covered by SquareTrade warrantys instead of Apple's?
Their data may be skewed by selection bias (but I can't say which way).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>Daniel\_Staal</author>
	<datestamp>1258747320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, given their size and portability, I'd expect netbooks to have harsher treatment than a laptop.  Laptops are big enough you think 'expensive computer' when you are handling one, where netbooks are (intentionally) designed to feel like they are more of a 'mid-sized electronic device'.</p><p>It's not much, but it could well account for a 1\% difference, IMHO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , given their size and portability , I 'd expect netbooks to have harsher treatment than a laptop .
Laptops are big enough you think 'expensive computer ' when you are handling one , where netbooks are ( intentionally ) designed to feel like they are more of a 'mid-sized electronic device'.It 's not much , but it could well account for a 1 \ % difference , IMHO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, given their size and portability, I'd expect netbooks to have harsher treatment than a laptop.
Laptops are big enough you think 'expensive computer' when you are handling one, where netbooks are (intentionally) designed to feel like they are more of a 'mid-sized electronic device'.It's not much, but it could well account for a 1\% difference, IMHO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175790</id>
	<title>Is this really a quality issue?</title>
	<author>Larry\_Dillon</author>
	<datestamp>1258749660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this really a quality issue?</p><p>Or, do people who buy more expensive products tend to be more computer-literate or take better care of products?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this really a quality issue ? Or , do people who buy more expensive products tend to be more computer-literate or take better care of products ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this really a quality issue?Or, do people who buy more expensive products tend to be more computer-literate or take better care of products?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174596</id>
	<title>hp netbook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258745880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>my hp netbook broke in less than 2 months and took them 2 months to fix..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>my hp netbook broke in less than 2 months and took them 2 months to fix. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>my hp netbook broke in less than 2 months and took them 2 months to fix..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177040</id>
	<title>Toshita?!?</title>
	<author>PeterKraus</author>
	<datestamp>1258710900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's surprising, at least for me, that Toshita is more reliable than Dell. I find Dells (apart from Inspiron serie) pretty much more reliable than anything else on the market. HP is quite well-known for it's high failure rate here....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's surprising , at least for me , that Toshita is more reliable than Dell .
I find Dells ( apart from Inspiron serie ) pretty much more reliable than anything else on the market .
HP is quite well-known for it 's high failure rate here... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's surprising, at least for me, that Toshita is more reliable than Dell.
I find Dells (apart from Inspiron serie) pretty much more reliable than anything else on the market.
HP is quite well-known for it's high failure rate here....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175054</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258747320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meh to both of you and the moronic mod.</p><p>It was an example of history, challenging the story's claim of "legendary reliability of Macs".  One of <i>dozens</i>.  The point being Apple has never had great hardware in their Macs, the entire idea is a complete myth from their fanboi armies.  And really, why should they?  Their entire business model is to sell you the new shiny and they've fought tooth and nail to prevent anyone from being real competition that might try to compete with build quality.  It's the reason you'll never see authorized Mac clones, the risk of quality hardware that's still a "Mac" would be <i>death</i> to Apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meh to both of you and the moronic mod.It was an example of history , challenging the story 's claim of " legendary reliability of Macs " .
One of dozens .
The point being Apple has never had great hardware in their Macs , the entire idea is a complete myth from their fanboi armies .
And really , why should they ?
Their entire business model is to sell you the new shiny and they 've fought tooth and nail to prevent anyone from being real competition that might try to compete with build quality .
It 's the reason you 'll never see authorized Mac clones , the risk of quality hardware that 's still a " Mac " would be death to Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meh to both of you and the moronic mod.It was an example of history, challenging the story's claim of "legendary reliability of Macs".
One of dozens.
The point being Apple has never had great hardware in their Macs, the entire idea is a complete myth from their fanboi armies.
And really, why should they?
Their entire business model is to sell you the new shiny and they've fought tooth and nail to prevent anyone from being real competition that might try to compete with build quality.
It's the reason you'll never see authorized Mac clones, the risk of quality hardware that's still a "Mac" would be death to Apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174790</id>
	<title>Next Big Revelation</title>
	<author>gyrogeerloose</author>
	<datestamp>1258746420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <b>Water Found to Be Wet!</b> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Water Found to Be Wet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Water Found to Be Wet! </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175240</id>
	<title>Re:Netbooks get handled a lot rougher . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258747860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you'd prefer to just go with your gut, instead of any kind of rigorous study? You're my kind of friend! <br> <br>
Has anyone told you about the benefits of cleaning your colon? I have an amazing deal that will rid you body of toxins, and help you live a longer life. Trust me. It all makes sense. <br> <br>Also, I have an amazing investment opportunity for someone of your good taste and wise judgment: Nigerian prince development! You've seen all the nigerian scams<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... because they work! For as little as $200 a month you can bankroll 500 Nigerian scammers, receiving 40\% of their profits. Only requires an initial one time fee of $20,000 for collateral.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 'd prefer to just go with your gut , instead of any kind of rigorous study ?
You 're my kind of friend !
Has anyone told you about the benefits of cleaning your colon ?
I have an amazing deal that will rid you body of toxins , and help you live a longer life .
Trust me .
It all makes sense .
Also , I have an amazing investment opportunity for someone of your good taste and wise judgment : Nigerian prince development !
You 've seen all the nigerian scams ... because they work !
For as little as $ 200 a month you can bankroll 500 Nigerian scammers , receiving 40 \ % of their profits .
Only requires an initial one time fee of $ 20,000 for collateral .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you'd prefer to just go with your gut, instead of any kind of rigorous study?
You're my kind of friend!
Has anyone told you about the benefits of cleaning your colon?
I have an amazing deal that will rid you body of toxins, and help you live a longer life.
Trust me.
It all makes sense.
Also, I have an amazing investment opportunity for someone of your good taste and wise judgment: Nigerian prince development!
You've seen all the nigerian scams ... because they work!
For as little as $200 a month you can bankroll 500 Nigerian scammers, receiving 40\% of their profits.
Only requires an initial one time fee of $20,000 for collateral.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174722</id>
	<title>Things that make you go, hmmm.</title>
	<author>ardyng</author>
	<datestamp>1258746240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The data are fishy. Do they fail because people buy a netbook because they can take them more places, and thus have a higher incidence of failure because they're being carried and used in more places?

My own experience with a netbook vs laptop is that the Asus EEE PC I purchased nearly two years ago is still going strong without a single hardware issue, vs the cheap Dell that lasted a year before developing critical power issues (right after my warranty expired, of course) and the Fujitsu Lifebook likewise failing with hinge death at about a year and a half, after a long run of problems.

My Asus netbook seems to just be more rugged than your average PC. Also, I take the thing everywhere, where my last laptops were left home a lot more because they weighed so much more.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The data are fishy .
Do they fail because people buy a netbook because they can take them more places , and thus have a higher incidence of failure because they 're being carried and used in more places ?
My own experience with a netbook vs laptop is that the Asus EEE PC I purchased nearly two years ago is still going strong without a single hardware issue , vs the cheap Dell that lasted a year before developing critical power issues ( right after my warranty expired , of course ) and the Fujitsu Lifebook likewise failing with hinge death at about a year and a half , after a long run of problems .
My Asus netbook seems to just be more rugged than your average PC .
Also , I take the thing everywhere , where my last laptops were left home a lot more because they weighed so much more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The data are fishy.
Do they fail because people buy a netbook because they can take them more places, and thus have a higher incidence of failure because they're being carried and used in more places?
My own experience with a netbook vs laptop is that the Asus EEE PC I purchased nearly two years ago is still going strong without a single hardware issue, vs the cheap Dell that lasted a year before developing critical power issues (right after my warranty expired, of course) and the Fujitsu Lifebook likewise failing with hinge death at about a year and a half, after a long run of problems.
My Asus netbook seems to just be more rugged than your average PC.
Also, I take the thing everywhere, where my last laptops were left home a lot more because they weighed so much more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175490</id>
	<title>I Fail To See The Problem...</title>
	<author>thepropain</author>
	<datestamp>1258748640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>1: You get what you pay for, and these boogers are practically disposable.
2: I got the granddaddy of 'em all, the Eee PC 701, the split-second they hit the market.  Aside from some case damage from taking it apart w/o a guide, still runs like a dream.</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 : You get what you pay for , and these boogers are practically disposable .
2 : I got the granddaddy of 'em all , the Eee PC 701 , the split-second they hit the market .
Aside from some case damage from taking it apart w/o a guide , still runs like a dream .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1: You get what you pay for, and these boogers are practically disposable.
2: I got the granddaddy of 'em all, the Eee PC 701, the split-second they hit the market.
Aside from some case damage from taking it apart w/o a guide, still runs like a dream.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175074</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1258747380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Price doesn't necessarily equal quality.</p><p>OTOH, these netbooks probably see more use than previous generations of laptops. They are seen as more useful as mobile devices and probably end up subjected to more use and abuse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Price does n't necessarily equal quality.OTOH , these netbooks probably see more use than previous generations of laptops .
They are seen as more useful as mobile devices and probably end up subjected to more use and abuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Price doesn't necessarily equal quality.OTOH, these netbooks probably see more use than previous generations of laptops.
They are seen as more useful as mobile devices and probably end up subjected to more use and abuse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176050</id>
	<title>Re:Correlation != Causality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258750740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To insert some unscientific anecdotal evidence; I've had my MacBook back in for repairs three times since I got it two years ago. But the issues I've taken it back for (some faint marks on the screen, and two cracked palmrests) I would have (and indeed have in the past) tolerated on a cheaper laptop with a manufacturer without a highstreet presence. My willingness to complain (and therefore register a failure) is raised because there's someone I can walk to and yell at who will fix it quickly and for free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To insert some unscientific anecdotal evidence ; I 've had my MacBook back in for repairs three times since I got it two years ago .
But the issues I 've taken it back for ( some faint marks on the screen , and two cracked palmrests ) I would have ( and indeed have in the past ) tolerated on a cheaper laptop with a manufacturer without a highstreet presence .
My willingness to complain ( and therefore register a failure ) is raised because there 's someone I can walk to and yell at who will fix it quickly and for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To insert some unscientific anecdotal evidence; I've had my MacBook back in for repairs three times since I got it two years ago.
But the issues I've taken it back for (some faint marks on the screen, and two cracked palmrests) I would have (and indeed have in the past) tolerated on a cheaper laptop with a manufacturer without a highstreet presence.
My willingness to complain (and therefore register a failure) is raised because there's someone I can walk to and yell at who will fix it quickly and for free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175910</id>
	<title>Question the source</title>
	<author>greyhueofdoubt</author>
	<datestamp>1258750020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. story brought this to my attention and I did some digging. It turns out that the entire tech-blog-sphere is basing their articles on a 'study' done by Squaretrade, a company that sells extended warranties for computers and phones. I won't get into the ethics of selling warranties for brand-new computers that already carry OEM warranties.</p><p>The problem is that Squaretrade is in direct competition with Apple's Applecare. A few quick searches on their website shows that their plans cost more than applecare and that they lack some of the features of applecare (phone support, apple store support, ups dropoff service, etc).</p><p>So my advice is to take that bar graph with a grain of salt.</p><p>-b</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another / .
story brought this to my attention and I did some digging .
It turns out that the entire tech-blog-sphere is basing their articles on a 'study ' done by Squaretrade , a company that sells extended warranties for computers and phones .
I wo n't get into the ethics of selling warranties for brand-new computers that already carry OEM warranties.The problem is that Squaretrade is in direct competition with Apple 's Applecare .
A few quick searches on their website shows that their plans cost more than applecare and that they lack some of the features of applecare ( phone support , apple store support , ups dropoff service , etc ) .So my advice is to take that bar graph with a grain of salt.-b</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another /.
story brought this to my attention and I did some digging.
It turns out that the entire tech-blog-sphere is basing their articles on a 'study' done by Squaretrade, a company that sells extended warranties for computers and phones.
I won't get into the ethics of selling warranties for brand-new computers that already carry OEM warranties.The problem is that Squaretrade is in direct competition with Apple's Applecare.
A few quick searches on their website shows that their plans cost more than applecare and that they lack some of the features of applecare (phone support, apple store support, ups dropoff service, etc).So my advice is to take that bar graph with a grain of salt.-b</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175288</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258747980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>whoa mac lover in the house</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>whoa mac lover in the house</tokentext>
<sentencetext>whoa mac lover in the house</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176504</id>
	<title>HP was the worst - I can tell the same</title>
	<author>miknix</author>
	<datestamp>1258709160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My two year HP pavillion dv6535ep laptop exibited the following behaviour during time:</p><p>* After two months:<br>
&nbsp; - A lcd pixel near the bottom right corner stoped working, it is red all the time.</p><p>* After four months:<br>
&nbsp; - Maximum battery capacity lowered to less than half.</p><p>* After a year and couple of months:<br>
&nbsp; - The integrated (USB) camera stopped working due to bad contact on wiring near screen hinge. The camera starts/stops working everytime the screen is tilted.</p><p>* After two years:<br>
&nbsp; - The power supply adapter stopped working (it shorts the mains when it gets too hot).</p><p>My previous laptop was a Acer Aspire 1520:<br>* The battery capacity didn't go below ~80\% after four years.<br>* The nvidia graphics card failed after one year and something.<br>* The power supply adapter failed with a lot of white smoke after two years and something.<br>* A SMD transistor popped up from mainboard after five years. After soldering it myself, the laptop continued working perfectly until today.</p><p>And yes, I'm carefull with laptops, I take proper measures to preserve battery life and my house's electrical mains are not faulty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My two year HP pavillion dv6535ep laptop exibited the following behaviour during time : * After two months :   - A lcd pixel near the bottom right corner stoped working , it is red all the time .
* After four months :   - Maximum battery capacity lowered to less than half .
* After a year and couple of months :   - The integrated ( USB ) camera stopped working due to bad contact on wiring near screen hinge .
The camera starts/stops working everytime the screen is tilted .
* After two years :   - The power supply adapter stopped working ( it shorts the mains when it gets too hot ) .My previous laptop was a Acer Aspire 1520 : * The battery capacity did n't go below ~ 80 \ % after four years .
* The nvidia graphics card failed after one year and something .
* The power supply adapter failed with a lot of white smoke after two years and something .
* A SMD transistor popped up from mainboard after five years .
After soldering it myself , the laptop continued working perfectly until today.And yes , I 'm carefull with laptops , I take proper measures to preserve battery life and my house 's electrical mains are not faulty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My two year HP pavillion dv6535ep laptop exibited the following behaviour during time:* After two months:
  - A lcd pixel near the bottom right corner stoped working, it is red all the time.
* After four months:
  - Maximum battery capacity lowered to less than half.
* After a year and couple of months:
  - The integrated (USB) camera stopped working due to bad contact on wiring near screen hinge.
The camera starts/stops working everytime the screen is tilted.
* After two years:
  - The power supply adapter stopped working (it shorts the mains when it gets too hot).My previous laptop was a Acer Aspire 1520:* The battery capacity didn't go below ~80\% after four years.
* The nvidia graphics card failed after one year and something.
* The power supply adapter failed with a lot of white smoke after two years and something.
* A SMD transistor popped up from mainboard after five years.
After soldering it myself, the laptop continued working perfectly until today.And yes, I'm carefull with laptops, I take proper measures to preserve battery life and my house's electrical mains are not faulty.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175094</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>yurtinus</author>
	<datestamp>1258747440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The models prior to MagSafe didn't, I've repaired to of them for family members. However in that case it still isn't attached to the motherboard-- the power board is a separate circuit card which could be had for about fifty bucks from resellers. I actually can't recall the last Mac notebook I dug into that had the power plug soldered to the motherboard... I'm fair certain they existed at one point, but it's kind of moot now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The models prior to MagSafe did n't , I 've repaired to of them for family members .
However in that case it still is n't attached to the motherboard-- the power board is a separate circuit card which could be had for about fifty bucks from resellers .
I actually ca n't recall the last Mac notebook I dug into that had the power plug soldered to the motherboard... I 'm fair certain they existed at one point , but it 's kind of moot now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The models prior to MagSafe didn't, I've repaired to of them for family members.
However in that case it still isn't attached to the motherboard-- the power board is a separate circuit card which could be had for about fifty bucks from resellers.
I actually can't recall the last Mac notebook I dug into that had the power plug soldered to the motherboard... I'm fair certain they existed at one point, but it's kind of moot now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174938</id>
	<title>Aren't netbooks more likely to get transported?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258746900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The whole selling point about netbooks is that you take it with you wherever you go, including the bus, the plane, and as such it's stuffed in backpacks or bumped around all the time.

The average laptop probably spends more time in one location and isn't transported as often, since a large portion of people are using them as replacement desktops that could be taken home if needed, but often aren't.  Myself I leave my laptop locked up at work if I don't need to do any work at home.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole selling point about netbooks is that you take it with you wherever you go , including the bus , the plane , and as such it 's stuffed in backpacks or bumped around all the time .
The average laptop probably spends more time in one location and is n't transported as often , since a large portion of people are using them as replacement desktops that could be taken home if needed , but often are n't .
Myself I leave my laptop locked up at work if I do n't need to do any work at home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole selling point about netbooks is that you take it with you wherever you go, including the bus, the plane, and as such it's stuffed in backpacks or bumped around all the time.
The average laptop probably spends more time in one location and isn't transported as often, since a large portion of people are using them as replacement desktops that could be taken home if needed, but often aren't.
Myself I leave my laptop locked up at work if I don't need to do any work at home.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174688</id>
	<title>SquareTrade</title>
	<author>Whorhay</author>
	<datestamp>1258746120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1.1\% to 1.6\% doesn't seem like that huge of a difference especially when we are talking about a device that is smaller and obviously more fragile than it's beefier compatriots. Not to mention the lower standards of quality when manufacturing a practically disposable mini computer.</p><p>Completely offtopic, but I remember almost getting scammed by someone on Autotrader.com years ago that wanted to use a third party company to hold my money while I test drove the car in question. The supposed third party was actually the scammer and was calling their "service" SquareTrade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1.1 \ % to 1.6 \ % does n't seem like that huge of a difference especially when we are talking about a device that is smaller and obviously more fragile than it 's beefier compatriots .
Not to mention the lower standards of quality when manufacturing a practically disposable mini computer.Completely offtopic , but I remember almost getting scammed by someone on Autotrader.com years ago that wanted to use a third party company to hold my money while I test drove the car in question .
The supposed third party was actually the scammer and was calling their " service " SquareTrade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.1\% to 1.6\% doesn't seem like that huge of a difference especially when we are talking about a device that is smaller and obviously more fragile than it's beefier compatriots.
Not to mention the lower standards of quality when manufacturing a practically disposable mini computer.Completely offtopic, but I remember almost getting scammed by someone on Autotrader.com years ago that wanted to use a third party company to hold my money while I test drove the car in question.
The supposed third party was actually the scammer and was calling their "service" SquareTrade.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174676</id>
	<title>They are cheaper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258746060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so people are less careful with them. Ooops, dropped it again...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so people are less careful with them .
Ooops , dropped it again.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so people are less careful with them.
Ooops, dropped it again...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178358</id>
	<title>Re:Aha!</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1258715340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"My current HP had its battery replaced twice because it had died within 3 months of the battery coming out of the box(both times)"</p><p>Let me guess, you leave a fully charged battery plugged into the laptop while the laptop is running constantly on AC power, don't you?</p><p>Because those batteries can't stand heat. Fully charged, a brand new battery sitting in an often-used laptop constantly running on AC power will get FUCKED after a couple of months. First time you'll unplug it, suddenly you've got 20, maybe 30 minutes of battery life at idle. The heat from the computer has screwed your battery.</p><p>I guess that PSA about three years ago never made  it out to the public ears, after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" My current HP had its battery replaced twice because it had died within 3 months of the battery coming out of the box ( both times ) " Let me guess , you leave a fully charged battery plugged into the laptop while the laptop is running constantly on AC power , do n't you ? Because those batteries ca n't stand heat .
Fully charged , a brand new battery sitting in an often-used laptop constantly running on AC power will get FUCKED after a couple of months .
First time you 'll unplug it , suddenly you 've got 20 , maybe 30 minutes of battery life at idle .
The heat from the computer has screwed your battery.I guess that PSA about three years ago never made it out to the public ears , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"My current HP had its battery replaced twice because it had died within 3 months of the battery coming out of the box(both times)"Let me guess, you leave a fully charged battery plugged into the laptop while the laptop is running constantly on AC power, don't you?Because those batteries can't stand heat.
Fully charged, a brand new battery sitting in an often-used laptop constantly running on AC power will get FUCKED after a couple of months.
First time you'll unplug it, suddenly you've got 20, maybe 30 minutes of battery life at idle.
The heat from the computer has screwed your battery.I guess that PSA about three years ago never made  it out to the public ears, after all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175406</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't netbooks more likely to get transported?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258748460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a really good point to note. Didnt RTFA, but I think this could be a very important insight. I have a laptop and it mainly just sits on my desk all day. Its also fairly expensive (over $1000) and I'm very careful with it as such.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a really good point to note .
Didnt RTFA , but I think this could be a very important insight .
I have a laptop and it mainly just sits on my desk all day .
Its also fairly expensive ( over $ 1000 ) and I 'm very careful with it as such .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a really good point to note.
Didnt RTFA, but I think this could be a very important insight.
I have a laptop and it mainly just sits on my desk all day.
Its also fairly expensive (over $1000) and I'm very careful with it as such.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175782</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>sheehaje</author>
	<datestamp>1258749660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was thinking the same thing.  People tend to look at Netbooks more as a toy.  It's much lighter weight tends to lead to people throwing it around more, or putting it in a backpack with a bunch of other items, whereas a laptop tends to be carried around in it's own laptop bag.</p><p>I wonder what the failure rate is of SSD models compared to regular hard drives, as not having any moving parts would seem to fair better, and be spec'd similar to a 'mid-sized electronic device'.  I have a Dell Mini 9 with an SSD, and when I saw that Dell was defaulting the newer Mini 10v's with a traditional HD, I kind of cringed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was thinking the same thing .
People tend to look at Netbooks more as a toy .
It 's much lighter weight tends to lead to people throwing it around more , or putting it in a backpack with a bunch of other items , whereas a laptop tends to be carried around in it 's own laptop bag.I wonder what the failure rate is of SSD models compared to regular hard drives , as not having any moving parts would seem to fair better , and be spec 'd similar to a 'mid-sized electronic device' .
I have a Dell Mini 9 with an SSD , and when I saw that Dell was defaulting the newer Mini 10v 's with a traditional HD , I kind of cringed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was thinking the same thing.
People tend to look at Netbooks more as a toy.
It's much lighter weight tends to lead to people throwing it around more, or putting it in a backpack with a bunch of other items, whereas a laptop tends to be carried around in it's own laptop bag.I wonder what the failure rate is of SSD models compared to regular hard drives, as not having any moving parts would seem to fair better, and be spec'd similar to a 'mid-sized electronic device'.
I have a Dell Mini 9 with an SSD, and when I saw that Dell was defaulting the newer Mini 10v's with a traditional HD, I kind of cringed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175728</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1258749360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Squaretrade claim to have only included new purchases in this survey.</p><p>Also thier definition of netbook is based on price alone, some very cheap craptops may sneak into the netbook category while the high end netbooks that have started appearing on the market would be lumped in with the low end notebooks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Squaretrade claim to have only included new purchases in this survey.Also thier definition of netbook is based on price alone , some very cheap craptops may sneak into the netbook category while the high end netbooks that have started appearing on the market would be lumped in with the low end notebooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Squaretrade claim to have only included new purchases in this survey.Also thier definition of netbook is based on price alone, some very cheap craptops may sneak into the netbook category while the high end netbooks that have started appearing on the market would be lumped in with the low end notebooks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175486</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>nxtw</author>
	<datestamp>1258748640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> Apple tends to hang more on the bleeding edge, and is naturally going to run into more frequent hardware failures as a result. Things like mandatory cameras, backlit keyboards, ambient light sensors, 11N, drop-head-parking, DVI, etc. I suppose in that respect a lot of Apple buyers are comparable to other brands' "early adopters", and the tradeoffs that brings.</p></div></blockquote><p>Apple isn't the only computer company selling systems with those features.  Backlit keyboards, ambient light sensors, and accelerometers have been found in non-Apple notebooks for years, but often only in the "business" models.</p><blockquote><div><p>What's more important to most people is the support they get when they have a problem. (and then the tables turn, violently)</p></div></blockquote><p>Other manufacturers sell extended warranties too - sometimes with better terms than AppleCare.  In general, you do need to buy a higher quality/more expensive "business" system and warranty though.  As an individual, I can go to Dell's website and order a Latitude laptop with next business day service.  With AppleCare and a laptop, I have to take it to an authorized repair shop (luckily, there are more of these than just Apple owned retail stores.)</p><p>Apple might have better service options available, but they don't seem to be marketed online...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple tends to hang more on the bleeding edge , and is naturally going to run into more frequent hardware failures as a result .
Things like mandatory cameras , backlit keyboards , ambient light sensors , 11N , drop-head-parking , DVI , etc .
I suppose in that respect a lot of Apple buyers are comparable to other brands ' " early adopters " , and the tradeoffs that brings.Apple is n't the only computer company selling systems with those features .
Backlit keyboards , ambient light sensors , and accelerometers have been found in non-Apple notebooks for years , but often only in the " business " models.What 's more important to most people is the support they get when they have a problem .
( and then the tables turn , violently ) Other manufacturers sell extended warranties too - sometimes with better terms than AppleCare .
In general , you do need to buy a higher quality/more expensive " business " system and warranty though .
As an individual , I can go to Dell 's website and order a Latitude laptop with next business day service .
With AppleCare and a laptop , I have to take it to an authorized repair shop ( luckily , there are more of these than just Apple owned retail stores .
) Apple might have better service options available , but they do n't seem to be marketed online.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Apple tends to hang more on the bleeding edge, and is naturally going to run into more frequent hardware failures as a result.
Things like mandatory cameras, backlit keyboards, ambient light sensors, 11N, drop-head-parking, DVI, etc.
I suppose in that respect a lot of Apple buyers are comparable to other brands' "early adopters", and the tradeoffs that brings.Apple isn't the only computer company selling systems with those features.
Backlit keyboards, ambient light sensors, and accelerometers have been found in non-Apple notebooks for years, but often only in the "business" models.What's more important to most people is the support they get when they have a problem.
(and then the tables turn, violently)Other manufacturers sell extended warranties too - sometimes with better terms than AppleCare.
In general, you do need to buy a higher quality/more expensive "business" system and warranty though.
As an individual, I can go to Dell's website and order a Latitude laptop with next business day service.
With AppleCare and a laptop, I have to take it to an authorized repair shop (luckily, there are more of these than just Apple owned retail stores.
)Apple might have better service options available, but they don't seem to be marketed online...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174886</id>
	<title>Nvidia?</title>
	<author>whoever57</author>
	<datestamp>1258746780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder how much of the failure rates is due to problems with Nvidia chips?</p><p>Before I get downmodded as a troll or for flamebait, please note that Nvidia has had well documented problems with reliablility, due to materials used in the chip bumping and finishing processes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how much of the failure rates is due to problems with Nvidia chips ? Before I get downmodded as a troll or for flamebait , please note that Nvidia has had well documented problems with reliablility , due to materials used in the chip bumping and finishing processes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how much of the failure rates is due to problems with Nvidia chips?Before I get downmodded as a troll or for flamebait, please note that Nvidia has had well documented problems with reliablility, due to materials used in the chip bumping and finishing processes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175630</id>
	<title>No Fujitsu laptops?</title>
	<author>fifirebel</author>
	<datestamp>1258749060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>These are in my experience the most reliable laptops I've ever owned.<br>
These things never break.</htmltext>
<tokenext>These are in my experience the most reliable laptops I 've ever owned .
These things never break .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are in my experience the most reliable laptops I've ever owned.
These things never break.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175256</id>
	<title>Heat dissipation</title>
	<author>motherjoe</author>
	<datestamp>1258747860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd say the heat dissipation is not as good in netbooks vs laptops just as starters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say the heat dissipation is not as good in netbooks vs laptops just as starters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say the heat dissipation is not as good in netbooks vs laptops just as starters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175588</id>
	<title>Size and portability might have something to do...</title>
	<author>Hamsterdan</author>
	<datestamp>1258748940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Something that fits in my jacket / backpack / cargo pants will likely be banged up and abused much more than my dad's laptop which is carried with care in a carrying case. It's been dropped a couple times, already had to replace the HDD.<br><br>It is a Seagate, so it just might have to being a crap HD though<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Something that fits in my jacket / backpack / cargo pants will likely be banged up and abused much more than my dad 's laptop which is carried with care in a carrying case .
It 's been dropped a couple times , already had to replace the HDD.It is a Seagate , so it just might have to being a crap HD though : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something that fits in my jacket / backpack / cargo pants will likely be banged up and abused much more than my dad's laptop which is carried with care in a carrying case.
It's been dropped a couple times, already had to replace the HDD.It is a Seagate, so it just might have to being a crap HD though :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175040</id>
	<title>Environment?</title>
	<author>hawguy</author>
	<datestamp>1258747260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder how much of the difference is due to the environment they are used (and transported) in.
</p><p>
My laptop spends most of it's time on my desk, and it travels in a laptop bag. But my netbook gets tossed in my backpack and I take it with me more often. Likewise, my gf takes hers to work in her (big) purse.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how much of the difference is due to the environment they are used ( and transported ) in .
My laptop spends most of it 's time on my desk , and it travels in a laptop bag .
But my netbook gets tossed in my backpack and I take it with me more often .
Likewise , my gf takes hers to work in her ( big ) purse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how much of the difference is due to the environment they are used (and transported) in.
My laptop spends most of it's time on my desk, and it travels in a laptop bag.
But my netbook gets tossed in my backpack and I take it with me more often.
Likewise, my gf takes hers to work in her (big) purse.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174690</id>
	<title>While I have no doubt this is true...</title>
	<author>slaker</author>
	<datestamp>1258746120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I have absolutely no doubt that $300 netbooks die more often, there's no way I'm going to trust the numbers from a company that primarily offers warranty service to computers sold on Ebay.</p><p>I strongly suspect that a lot of the Apple, Dell and (especially) Lenovo notebooks they're servicing are several years old and are probably used or lease return models to begin with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I have absolutely no doubt that $ 300 netbooks die more often , there 's no way I 'm going to trust the numbers from a company that primarily offers warranty service to computers sold on Ebay.I strongly suspect that a lot of the Apple , Dell and ( especially ) Lenovo notebooks they 're servicing are several years old and are probably used or lease return models to begin with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I have absolutely no doubt that $300 netbooks die more often, there's no way I'm going to trust the numbers from a company that primarily offers warranty service to computers sold on Ebay.I strongly suspect that a lot of the Apple, Dell and (especially) Lenovo notebooks they're servicing are several years old and are probably used or lease return models to begin with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175654</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>WaXHeLL</author>
	<datestamp>1258749120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As for this SquareTrade article, it wouldn't surprise me if Apple fell a few points behind other manufacturers, though I cannot possibly imagine why someone would buy a new Mac and get a SquareTrade warranty instead of Apple's excellent 3-year warranty.  Makes me wonder if the Macs covered by SquareTrade are largely used?  You can't buy them at Target.</p></div><p>Because Squaretrade's warranty is about half the cost of Applecare?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As for this SquareTrade article , it would n't surprise me if Apple fell a few points behind other manufacturers , though I can not possibly imagine why someone would buy a new Mac and get a SquareTrade warranty instead of Apple 's excellent 3-year warranty .
Makes me wonder if the Macs covered by SquareTrade are largely used ?
You ca n't buy them at Target.Because Squaretrade 's warranty is about half the cost of Applecare ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As for this SquareTrade article, it wouldn't surprise me if Apple fell a few points behind other manufacturers, though I cannot possibly imagine why someone would buy a new Mac and get a SquareTrade warranty instead of Apple's excellent 3-year warranty.
Makes me wonder if the Macs covered by SquareTrade are largely used?
You can't buy them at Target.Because Squaretrade's warranty is about half the cost of Applecare?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175500</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258748700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd rather have my mobo go out twice and be covered both times, than for it to go out once and <b>not</b> be covered</p></div><p>Isn't that point kind of moot when you could completely replace a non-Mac twice and it would STILL cost less?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd rather have my mobo go out twice and be covered both times , than for it to go out once and not be coveredIs n't that point kind of moot when you could completely replace a non-Mac twice and it would STILL cost less ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd rather have my mobo go out twice and be covered both times, than for it to go out once and not be coveredIsn't that point kind of moot when you could completely replace a non-Mac twice and it would STILL cost less?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175104</id>
	<title>Correlation != Causality</title>
	<author>Life2Short</author>
	<datestamp>1258747440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>But correlation isn't causality.  It may be that cheaper = worse, or it may be that cheaper = smaller form factor = more portability = more transportation and use = more wear and tear = more breakdowns.  The article also says that Apple laptops are less reliable, but it could also be that Apple laptops are used more by their owners and again are subject or greater wear and tear.  Or it could be that Apple makes crap laptops.  With a correlation design, you cannot infer causality.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But correlation is n't causality .
It may be that cheaper = worse , or it may be that cheaper = smaller form factor = more portability = more transportation and use = more wear and tear = more breakdowns .
The article also says that Apple laptops are less reliable , but it could also be that Apple laptops are used more by their owners and again are subject or greater wear and tear .
Or it could be that Apple makes crap laptops .
With a correlation design , you can not infer causality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But correlation isn't causality.
It may be that cheaper = worse, or it may be that cheaper = smaller form factor = more portability = more transportation and use = more wear and tear = more breakdowns.
The article also says that Apple laptops are less reliable, but it could also be that Apple laptops are used more by their owners and again are subject or greater wear and tear.
Or it could be that Apple makes crap laptops.
With a correlation design, you cannot infer causality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174548</id>
	<title>Aha!</title>
	<author>sneakyimp</author>
	<datestamp>1258745700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought my prejudice against HP laptops was just emotional or superstitious or something. 25.6\% malfunction??  They really need to work on that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought my prejudice against HP laptops was just emotional or superstitious or something .
25.6 \ % malfunction ? ?
They really need to work on that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought my prejudice against HP laptops was just emotional or superstitious or something.
25.6\% malfunction??
They really need to work on that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174720</id>
	<title>Competition leads to failure rates</title>
	<author>Dadamh</author>
	<datestamp>1258746240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Look, the reason these machines are failing more readily really isn't that complex.

The market for netbooks is effectively a competition to see who can produce the cheapest functioning computer that can connect to the internet quickly.  That's all it is.  When companies aim to reduce retail cost of their products, they begin cutting corners.  They buy cheap parts, they rush production, they slap things together that they know don't work as well.

It's nothing amazing or surprising.

Netbooks are just cheap.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Look , the reason these machines are failing more readily really is n't that complex .
The market for netbooks is effectively a competition to see who can produce the cheapest functioning computer that can connect to the internet quickly .
That 's all it is .
When companies aim to reduce retail cost of their products , they begin cutting corners .
They buy cheap parts , they rush production , they slap things together that they know do n't work as well .
It 's nothing amazing or surprising .
Netbooks are just cheap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look, the reason these machines are failing more readily really isn't that complex.
The market for netbooks is effectively a competition to see who can produce the cheapest functioning computer that can connect to the internet quickly.
That's all it is.
When companies aim to reduce retail cost of their products, they begin cutting corners.
They buy cheap parts, they rush production, they slap things together that they know don't work as well.
It's nothing amazing or surprising.
Netbooks are just cheap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181160</id>
	<title>Re:Correlation != Causality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258730460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Note however that the article implies that all these warranty/defect issues are handled through the same outlet - a separate warranty provider.  It does not seem to be the case that they're comparing stats from different repair channels (eg. taking a macbook to a nearby physical location vs. mailing out a different type of laptop to some distant repair location), but rather a single uniform repair handling channel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Note however that the article implies that all these warranty/defect issues are handled through the same outlet - a separate warranty provider .
It does not seem to be the case that they 're comparing stats from different repair channels ( eg .
taking a macbook to a nearby physical location vs. mailing out a different type of laptop to some distant repair location ) , but rather a single uniform repair handling channel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note however that the article implies that all these warranty/defect issues are handled through the same outlet - a separate warranty provider.
It does not seem to be the case that they're comparing stats from different repair channels (eg.
taking a macbook to a nearby physical location vs. mailing out a different type of laptop to some distant repair location), but rather a single uniform repair handling channel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175536</id>
	<title>Re:Jive with anyone else's experience.</title>
	<author>99BottlesOfBeerInMyF</author>
	<datestamp>1258748760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I saw this the other day. What struck me most is that Sony and Apple have historically had the highest failure rates in the industry (maybe other than HP), and Dell has had among the lowest.</p></div><p>According to consumer reports, the opposite has been true for a long time. Dell used to have terrible rates, and as of the last study, was doing poorly for desktops, but near the top for laptops. Apple consistently scores the highest for laptop reliability among all companies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw this the other day .
What struck me most is that Sony and Apple have historically had the highest failure rates in the industry ( maybe other than HP ) , and Dell has had among the lowest.According to consumer reports , the opposite has been true for a long time .
Dell used to have terrible rates , and as of the last study , was doing poorly for desktops , but near the top for laptops .
Apple consistently scores the highest for laptop reliability among all companies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw this the other day.
What struck me most is that Sony and Apple have historically had the highest failure rates in the industry (maybe other than HP), and Dell has had among the lowest.According to consumer reports, the opposite has been true for a long time.
Dell used to have terrible rates, and as of the last study, was doing poorly for desktops, but near the top for laptops.
Apple consistently scores the highest for laptop reliability among all companies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175854</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258749840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dropped my netbook. It works fine. I would not have dropped my laptop in the same situation, because I would not have used my laptop in the same situation. Had I dropped my laptop like I dropped my netbook, it would certainly have sustained damage. The netbook is smaller, so the forces are smaller too. A small screen is less likely to crack, a solid state hard disk is not going to have a head crash. The robustness is countered by more demanding usage patterns: We simply put netbooks through a lot more than laptops.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dropped my netbook .
It works fine .
I would not have dropped my laptop in the same situation , because I would not have used my laptop in the same situation .
Had I dropped my laptop like I dropped my netbook , it would certainly have sustained damage .
The netbook is smaller , so the forces are smaller too .
A small screen is less likely to crack , a solid state hard disk is not going to have a head crash .
The robustness is countered by more demanding usage patterns : We simply put netbooks through a lot more than laptops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dropped my netbook.
It works fine.
I would not have dropped my laptop in the same situation, because I would not have used my laptop in the same situation.
Had I dropped my laptop like I dropped my netbook, it would certainly have sustained damage.
The netbook is smaller, so the forces are smaller too.
A small screen is less likely to crack, a solid state hard disk is not going to have a head crash.
The robustness is countered by more demanding usage patterns: We simply put netbooks through a lot more than laptops.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175352</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1258748280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd consider that a 20\% difference myself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd consider that a 20 \ % difference myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd consider that a 20\% difference myself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181830</id>
	<title>Re:Jive with anyone else's experience.</title>
	<author>ajlisows</author>
	<datestamp>1258737300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do corporate support for a smallish company but also do support for a variety of really small companies and of course, do a lot of home user support.  I used to be a Toshiba fanboy but I've found the failure rates to be rising sharply, especially in their consumer lines.  I personally am on my second Satellite in 18 months.  First one started shutting down 5-6 randomly times a day just after the warranty period ended.  Current one is 6 months old and is now doing the same.  I've also seen this with about 20 other laptops from various types of users.  This will be the last Toshiba I own.</p><p>Conversely, I have grown to love HP's laptops.  I'm talking $800-$1000 range laptops so nothing terribly high end.  The shortest life I've seen out of them recently is about 2.5 years which in actuality is pretty good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do corporate support for a smallish company but also do support for a variety of really small companies and of course , do a lot of home user support .
I used to be a Toshiba fanboy but I 've found the failure rates to be rising sharply , especially in their consumer lines .
I personally am on my second Satellite in 18 months .
First one started shutting down 5-6 randomly times a day just after the warranty period ended .
Current one is 6 months old and is now doing the same .
I 've also seen this with about 20 other laptops from various types of users .
This will be the last Toshiba I own.Conversely , I have grown to love HP 's laptops .
I 'm talking $ 800- $ 1000 range laptops so nothing terribly high end .
The shortest life I 've seen out of them recently is about 2.5 years which in actuality is pretty good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do corporate support for a smallish company but also do support for a variety of really small companies and of course, do a lot of home user support.
I used to be a Toshiba fanboy but I've found the failure rates to be rising sharply, especially in their consumer lines.
I personally am on my second Satellite in 18 months.
First one started shutting down 5-6 randomly times a day just after the warranty period ended.
Current one is 6 months old and is now doing the same.
I've also seen this with about 20 other laptops from various types of users.
This will be the last Toshiba I own.Conversely, I have grown to love HP's laptops.
I'm talking $800-$1000 range laptops so nothing terribly high end.
The shortest life I've seen out of them recently is about 2.5 years which in actuality is pretty good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174924</id>
	<title>I suppose it's not too shocking</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1258746840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't too surprising, really.  Whenever you go for the cheap end of things, you get poor quality.
</p><p>Now don't understand me-- I'm not saying that it's good.  I think it'd be great if we could make cheap things also be good quality.  Like I imagine someone could manufacture netbooks and still sell them relatively cheaply just by virtue of the fact that they use fewer components and less materials.  However, the tendency in a situation like this is for the manufacturer to say, "These are cheaper products with tight profit margins.  These are also budget products, and people who buy budget products will tend to buy the cheapest thing available.  Let's just cut every corner, make them as cheap as possible, and not worry too much about quality."  It's the same reason we get $5 blenders at Walmart that break after a year.
</p><p>Of course, the problem is often that it's hard for consumers to tell the difference, so companies sometimes don't provide a good middle ground.  Like you might find yourself in a situation where you can find a cheap $5-10 blender that will break in the next year, and the next step up is a $1000 "luxury" blender with a built in toaster oven, speakers, and iPhone dock.  I guess simple, high quality, economical goods don't sell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't too surprising , really .
Whenever you go for the cheap end of things , you get poor quality .
Now do n't understand me-- I 'm not saying that it 's good .
I think it 'd be great if we could make cheap things also be good quality .
Like I imagine someone could manufacture netbooks and still sell them relatively cheaply just by virtue of the fact that they use fewer components and less materials .
However , the tendency in a situation like this is for the manufacturer to say , " These are cheaper products with tight profit margins .
These are also budget products , and people who buy budget products will tend to buy the cheapest thing available .
Let 's just cut every corner , make them as cheap as possible , and not worry too much about quality .
" It 's the same reason we get $ 5 blenders at Walmart that break after a year .
Of course , the problem is often that it 's hard for consumers to tell the difference , so companies sometimes do n't provide a good middle ground .
Like you might find yourself in a situation where you can find a cheap $ 5-10 blender that will break in the next year , and the next step up is a $ 1000 " luxury " blender with a built in toaster oven , speakers , and iPhone dock .
I guess simple , high quality , economical goods do n't sell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't too surprising, really.
Whenever you go for the cheap end of things, you get poor quality.
Now don't understand me-- I'm not saying that it's good.
I think it'd be great if we could make cheap things also be good quality.
Like I imagine someone could manufacture netbooks and still sell them relatively cheaply just by virtue of the fact that they use fewer components and less materials.
However, the tendency in a situation like this is for the manufacturer to say, "These are cheaper products with tight profit margins.
These are also budget products, and people who buy budget products will tend to buy the cheapest thing available.
Let's just cut every corner, make them as cheap as possible, and not worry too much about quality.
"  It's the same reason we get $5 blenders at Walmart that break after a year.
Of course, the problem is often that it's hard for consumers to tell the difference, so companies sometimes don't provide a good middle ground.
Like you might find yourself in a situation where you can find a cheap $5-10 blender that will break in the next year, and the next step up is a $1000 "luxury" blender with a built in toaster oven, speakers, and iPhone dock.
I guess simple, high quality, economical goods don't sell.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176596</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>Anachragnome</author>
	<datestamp>1258709520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey! Someone actually read the comments from the TFA!</p><p>Yes, someone pointed out the very same thing you are stating. A complete reversal of rating for HP machines from one year to the next, and I agree with you. It sounds as if SquareTrade is simply fudging the numbers based on something undisclosed to us.</p><p>My guess? HP paid them more then the other guys did last year.</p><p>Why do I say that? From my previous experience with after-market warranty firms (I was the service dude that had to try and get them to pay up for repairs--kinda like trying to get money from a medical insurer). After-market warranty companies have a vested interest in screwing the customer over--it increases profits.</p><p>All that being said, I don't trust a SINGLE word they speak or write. I have to agree with Lenovo on this one simply because of who is responsible for the data released.</p><p>But one thing still puzzles me. SquareTrade has the opportunity to decrease their costs by making sure their data is correct--the end result being people buying more reliable computers and thus they pay out less for repairs.</p><p>But on the other hand, if everyone buys computers that don't break often, the need for after-market warranties decreases...Hrmm</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey !
Someone actually read the comments from the TFA ! Yes , someone pointed out the very same thing you are stating .
A complete reversal of rating for HP machines from one year to the next , and I agree with you .
It sounds as if SquareTrade is simply fudging the numbers based on something undisclosed to us.My guess ?
HP paid them more then the other guys did last year.Why do I say that ?
From my previous experience with after-market warranty firms ( I was the service dude that had to try and get them to pay up for repairs--kinda like trying to get money from a medical insurer ) .
After-market warranty companies have a vested interest in screwing the customer over--it increases profits.All that being said , I do n't trust a SINGLE word they speak or write .
I have to agree with Lenovo on this one simply because of who is responsible for the data released.But one thing still puzzles me .
SquareTrade has the opportunity to decrease their costs by making sure their data is correct--the end result being people buying more reliable computers and thus they pay out less for repairs.But on the other hand , if everyone buys computers that do n't break often , the need for after-market warranties decreases...Hrmm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey!
Someone actually read the comments from the TFA!Yes, someone pointed out the very same thing you are stating.
A complete reversal of rating for HP machines from one year to the next, and I agree with you.
It sounds as if SquareTrade is simply fudging the numbers based on something undisclosed to us.My guess?
HP paid them more then the other guys did last year.Why do I say that?
From my previous experience with after-market warranty firms (I was the service dude that had to try and get them to pay up for repairs--kinda like trying to get money from a medical insurer).
After-market warranty companies have a vested interest in screwing the customer over--it increases profits.All that being said, I don't trust a SINGLE word they speak or write.
I have to agree with Lenovo on this one simply because of who is responsible for the data released.But one thing still puzzles me.
SquareTrade has the opportunity to decrease their costs by making sure their data is correct--the end result being people buying more reliable computers and thus they pay out less for repairs.But on the other hand, if everyone buys computers that don't break often, the need for after-market warranties decreases...Hrmm</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30183430</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>mister\_dave</author>
	<datestamp>1258808160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>... Macs<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... overall they have proven (to me anyway) that they are generally much more reliable than systems made by Windows PC vendors.</p></div></blockquote><p>A 2006 <a href="http://www.macintouch.com/reliability/laptops.html" title="macintouch.com" rel="nofollow">survey by MacInTouch.com</a> [macintouch.com] suggested the failure rate for G3 iBooks was 73\%.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... Macs ... overall they have proven ( to me anyway ) that they are generally much more reliable than systems made by Windows PC vendors.A 2006 survey by MacInTouch.com [ macintouch.com ] suggested the failure rate for G3 iBooks was 73 \ % .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Macs ... overall they have proven (to me anyway) that they are generally much more reliable than systems made by Windows PC vendors.A 2006 survey by MacInTouch.com [macintouch.com] suggested the failure rate for G3 iBooks was 73\%.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30179930</id>
	<title>Warranty date</title>
	<author>ruewan</author>
	<datestamp>1258722420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have just found that mine usually fails right after the warranty runs out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have just found that mine usually fails right after the warranty runs out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have just found that mine usually fails right after the warranty runs out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178568</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1258716120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Apple tends to hang more on the bleeding edge,"</p><p>Which is why they're finally on Intel hardware after so many years....</p><p>"and is naturally going to run into more frequent hardware failures as a result."</p><p>Maybe it's the cheap labor they have in Guadalajara where the mobos were manufactured.</p><p>"Things like mandatory cameras, backlit keyboards, ambient light sensors, 11N, drop-head-parking, DVI, etc. I suppose in that respect a lot of Apple buyers are comparable to other brands' "early adopters", and the tradeoffs that brings."</p><p>Except some of that's been in non-Apple systems for many years prior. Toughbook with the drop head parking. Backlit keyboards are nothing new, not for ten years easily, but maybe LED ones in laptops, before led backlighting some laptops used fiber optic lighting. DVI in a proprietary connector, yes, but that still doesn't come close to the four output options on my HP Laptop (Component, s-video, VGA, HDMI.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Apple tends to hang more on the bleeding edge , " Which is why they 're finally on Intel hardware after so many years.... " and is naturally going to run into more frequent hardware failures as a result .
" Maybe it 's the cheap labor they have in Guadalajara where the mobos were manufactured .
" Things like mandatory cameras , backlit keyboards , ambient light sensors , 11N , drop-head-parking , DVI , etc .
I suppose in that respect a lot of Apple buyers are comparable to other brands ' " early adopters " , and the tradeoffs that brings .
" Except some of that 's been in non-Apple systems for many years prior .
Toughbook with the drop head parking .
Backlit keyboards are nothing new , not for ten years easily , but maybe LED ones in laptops , before led backlighting some laptops used fiber optic lighting .
DVI in a proprietary connector , yes , but that still does n't come close to the four output options on my HP Laptop ( Component , s-video , VGA , HDMI .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Apple tends to hang more on the bleeding edge,"Which is why they're finally on Intel hardware after so many years...."and is naturally going to run into more frequent hardware failures as a result.
"Maybe it's the cheap labor they have in Guadalajara where the mobos were manufactured.
"Things like mandatory cameras, backlit keyboards, ambient light sensors, 11N, drop-head-parking, DVI, etc.
I suppose in that respect a lot of Apple buyers are comparable to other brands' "early adopters", and the tradeoffs that brings.
"Except some of that's been in non-Apple systems for many years prior.
Toughbook with the drop head parking.
Backlit keyboards are nothing new, not for ten years easily, but maybe LED ones in laptops, before led backlighting some laptops used fiber optic lighting.
DVI in a proprietary connector, yes, but that still doesn't come close to the four output options on my HP Laptop (Component, s-video, VGA, HDMI.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30179242</id>
	<title>The failure rates are all the same</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258719120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From a practical standpoint, that is.  Whether the failure rate is 5.8\% or 4.2\% (even assuming the differences are statistically significant), all of the devices give the buyer about a 19/20 chance of success and a 1/20 chance of failure.  I can't see basing any buying decision on that, as opposed to a $300 vs $1200 price, or whether the machine has capabilities that meet your needs well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From a practical standpoint , that is .
Whether the failure rate is 5.8 \ % or 4.2 \ % ( even assuming the differences are statistically significant ) , all of the devices give the buyer about a 19/20 chance of success and a 1/20 chance of failure .
I ca n't see basing any buying decision on that , as opposed to a $ 300 vs $ 1200 price , or whether the machine has capabilities that meet your needs well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a practical standpoint, that is.
Whether the failure rate is 5.8\% or 4.2\% (even assuming the differences are statistically significant), all of the devices give the buyer about a 19/20 chance of success and a 1/20 chance of failure.
I can't see basing any buying decision on that, as opposed to a $300 vs $1200 price, or whether the machine has capabilities that meet your needs well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30180384</id>
	<title>Not always...</title>
	<author>Burning1</author>
	<datestamp>1258724760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bet that in 20 years, my tin can will still be holding soup, whereas your laptop will, at best, be sitting on a shelf in a museum.</p><p>Sometimes a simple device with fewer parts can be both less expensive and more reliable than the more expensive model. This is particularly true of some generations of the high end gaming laptops, dealing with heat issues in a small space. They were both quite expensive, and somewhat unreliable.</p><p>With net-books, the fact that they cost 1/4th of what a high end laptop would go for is a given. It's not a given that they would be less reliable - it's easy to cool a low clocked processor and video card - a well designed model might not need fans. Likewise a small, low resoltion display might not have as high a defect rate, and it's very reasonable to expect flash memory to be more reliable than a hard drive in typical use-case scenarios.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet that in 20 years , my tin can will still be holding soup , whereas your laptop will , at best , be sitting on a shelf in a museum.Sometimes a simple device with fewer parts can be both less expensive and more reliable than the more expensive model .
This is particularly true of some generations of the high end gaming laptops , dealing with heat issues in a small space .
They were both quite expensive , and somewhat unreliable.With net-books , the fact that they cost 1/4th of what a high end laptop would go for is a given .
It 's not a given that they would be less reliable - it 's easy to cool a low clocked processor and video card - a well designed model might not need fans .
Likewise a small , low resoltion display might not have as high a defect rate , and it 's very reasonable to expect flash memory to be more reliable than a hard drive in typical use-case scenarios .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet that in 20 years, my tin can will still be holding soup, whereas your laptop will, at best, be sitting on a shelf in a museum.Sometimes a simple device with fewer parts can be both less expensive and more reliable than the more expensive model.
This is particularly true of some generations of the high end gaming laptops, dealing with heat issues in a small space.
They were both quite expensive, and somewhat unreliable.With net-books, the fact that they cost 1/4th of what a high end laptop would go for is a given.
It's not a given that they would be less reliable - it's easy to cool a low clocked processor and video card - a well designed model might not need fans.
Likewise a small, low resoltion display might not have as high a defect rate, and it's very reasonable to expect flash memory to be more reliable than a hard drive in typical use-case scenarios.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174696</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258746120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I second that. Where the real money is spent on netbooks is the smaller form factor - not the mature hardware. Smaller keyboards, smaller screens, smaller cases. And with all the netbooks competing on price point I will guarantee that the cases are as cheap as they can get away with.<br>
<br>
Value priced + Early in Life Cycle = Poor Quality</htmltext>
<tokenext>I second that .
Where the real money is spent on netbooks is the smaller form factor - not the mature hardware .
Smaller keyboards , smaller screens , smaller cases .
And with all the netbooks competing on price point I will guarantee that the cases are as cheap as they can get away with .
Value priced + Early in Life Cycle = Poor Quality</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I second that.
Where the real money is spent on netbooks is the smaller form factor - not the mature hardware.
Smaller keyboards, smaller screens, smaller cases.
And with all the netbooks competing on price point I will guarantee that the cases are as cheap as they can get away with.
Value priced + Early in Life Cycle = Poor Quality</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175210</id>
	<title>Re:Netbooks get handled a lot rougher . . .</title>
	<author>Joce640k</author>
	<datestamp>1258747740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And when something is that small/light/portable the gyroscopes in the hard disk are going to take a lot more stress when they're spinning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And when something is that small/light/portable the gyroscopes in the hard disk are going to take a lot more stress when they 're spinning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And when something is that small/light/portable the gyroscopes in the hard disk are going to take a lot more stress when they're spinning.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175792</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>tonyreadsnews</author>
	<datestamp>1258749660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't forget to add in the total lifetime of netbooks.<br>
For most new types of products it takes a while to determine exactly how they are used and what needs to be done to improve reliability.<br>
Laptops now have some features in them to help reliability that weren't there in the earlier years.<br> <br>Heck their are whole new products built to be 'tough' to handle rougher treatment.<br>same thing for cellphones</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget to add in the total lifetime of netbooks .
For most new types of products it takes a while to determine exactly how they are used and what needs to be done to improve reliability .
Laptops now have some features in them to help reliability that were n't there in the earlier years .
Heck their are whole new products built to be 'tough ' to handle rougher treatment.same thing for cellphones</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget to add in the total lifetime of netbooks.
For most new types of products it takes a while to determine exactly how they are used and what needs to be done to improve reliability.
Laptops now have some features in them to help reliability that weren't there in the earlier years.
Heck their are whole new products built to be 'tough' to handle rougher treatment.same thing for cellphones</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30179024</id>
	<title>Re:Aha!</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1258717980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would say it is the Compaq line that is cranking up those numbers. Look at any Black Friday ads and you'll see the uber shitty $300 laptop is nearly always a Compaq. They really crank out some shitty laptops, like the Celeron I worked on last month where I had to keep a fan pointed at the damned thing just to keep it from overheating while I worked on it. They put DESKTOP chips in the thing, can you believe it? And it was a fricking Netburst P4 based Celery! Like you can put one of those space heaters in a laptop form factor and expect it to work well!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would say it is the Compaq line that is cranking up those numbers .
Look at any Black Friday ads and you 'll see the uber shitty $ 300 laptop is nearly always a Compaq .
They really crank out some shitty laptops , like the Celeron I worked on last month where I had to keep a fan pointed at the damned thing just to keep it from overheating while I worked on it .
They put DESKTOP chips in the thing , can you believe it ?
And it was a fricking Netburst P4 based Celery !
Like you can put one of those space heaters in a laptop form factor and expect it to work well !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would say it is the Compaq line that is cranking up those numbers.
Look at any Black Friday ads and you'll see the uber shitty $300 laptop is nearly always a Compaq.
They really crank out some shitty laptops, like the Celeron I worked on last month where I had to keep a fan pointed at the damned thing just to keep it from overheating while I worked on it.
They put DESKTOP chips in the thing, can you believe it?
And it was a fricking Netburst P4 based Celery!
Like you can put one of those space heaters in a laptop form factor and expect it to work well!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175380</id>
	<title>Dell?</title>
	<author>228e2</author>
	<datestamp>1258748340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did anyone else find it odd that Dell was not listed or even mentioned? Or that data seemed to be missing?<br> <br>
Give us a spiffy little graphic or something. What was all tested?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone else find it odd that Dell was not listed or even mentioned ?
Or that data seemed to be missing ?
Give us a spiffy little graphic or something .
What was all tested ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone else find it odd that Dell was not listed or even mentioned?
Or that data seemed to be missing?
Give us a spiffy little graphic or something.
What was all tested?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174940</id>
	<title>surprise</title>
	<author>thehostiles</author>
	<datestamp>1258746900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and why is this not surprising in the least?
you're trying to pack a processor and all the necessary components for a real computer in a netbook not much room for error</htmltext>
<tokenext>and why is this not surprising in the least ?
you 're trying to pack a processor and all the necessary components for a real computer in a netbook not much room for error</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and why is this not surprising in the least?
you're trying to pack a processor and all the necessary components for a real computer in a netbook not much room for error</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175438</id>
	<title>Re:While I have no doubt this is true...</title>
	<author>99BottlesOfBeerInMyF</author>
	<datestamp>1258748520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I strongly suspect that a lot of the Apple, Dell and (especially) Lenovo notebooks they're servicing are several years old and are probably used or lease return models to begin with.</p></div><p>They claim none of the laptops in the study are refurbished or used models. That said, they do provide warranties for used items and I'm not sure I trust them until they release the raw data. More importantly, they claim to report failures bad upon the purchase date of the laptop. Apple, for example, provides a full year of free hardware coverage for all systems, but their data does not show any jump at the one year point, which it should, even if Apple were the only company to offer such a warranty, which is doubtful. Frankly, I don't see how their numbers could be correct. I'm also curious about some of the sample sizes for companies like Apple and Dell who provide warranties by default.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I strongly suspect that a lot of the Apple , Dell and ( especially ) Lenovo notebooks they 're servicing are several years old and are probably used or lease return models to begin with.They claim none of the laptops in the study are refurbished or used models .
That said , they do provide warranties for used items and I 'm not sure I trust them until they release the raw data .
More importantly , they claim to report failures bad upon the purchase date of the laptop .
Apple , for example , provides a full year of free hardware coverage for all systems , but their data does not show any jump at the one year point , which it should , even if Apple were the only company to offer such a warranty , which is doubtful .
Frankly , I do n't see how their numbers could be correct .
I 'm also curious about some of the sample sizes for companies like Apple and Dell who provide warranties by default .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I strongly suspect that a lot of the Apple, Dell and (especially) Lenovo notebooks they're servicing are several years old and are probably used or lease return models to begin with.They claim none of the laptops in the study are refurbished or used models.
That said, they do provide warranties for used items and I'm not sure I trust them until they release the raw data.
More importantly, they claim to report failures bad upon the purchase date of the laptop.
Apple, for example, provides a full year of free hardware coverage for all systems, but their data does not show any jump at the one year point, which it should, even if Apple were the only company to offer such a warranty, which is doubtful.
Frankly, I don't see how their numbers could be correct.
I'm also curious about some of the sample sizes for companies like Apple and Dell who provide warranties by default.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30180672</id>
	<title>Re:Netbooks get handled a lot rougher . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258726740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the "lighter" angle actually works in their favor, it's the whole cube-square law. Given otherwise similar construction, smaller machines should have better chances of surviving a given fall...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the " lighter " angle actually works in their favor , it 's the whole cube-square law .
Given otherwise similar construction , smaller machines should have better chances of surviving a given fall.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the "lighter" angle actually works in their favor, it's the whole cube-square law.
Given otherwise similar construction, smaller machines should have better chances of surviving a given fall...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175528</id>
	<title>Re:Nvidia?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258748760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I second this! I have had 2 HP Laptop failures, both due to the failure of the nVidia chip, requiring a MB replacement. I have a number of friends with Powerbooks that also had video failures. In all cases, both with the HP Laptops and Powerbooks, the same nVidia chip was the issue. This is not to knock nVidia, just that series of chip! I've had NO failures with other nVidia products.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I second this !
I have had 2 HP Laptop failures , both due to the failure of the nVidia chip , requiring a MB replacement .
I have a number of friends with Powerbooks that also had video failures .
In all cases , both with the HP Laptops and Powerbooks , the same nVidia chip was the issue .
This is not to knock nVidia , just that series of chip !
I 've had NO failures with other nVidia products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I second this!
I have had 2 HP Laptop failures, both due to the failure of the nVidia chip, requiring a MB replacement.
I have a number of friends with Powerbooks that also had video failures.
In all cases, both with the HP Laptops and Powerbooks, the same nVidia chip was the issue.
This is not to knock nVidia, just that series of chip!
I've had NO failures with other nVidia products.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175358</id>
	<title>They are used in different ways</title>
	<author>HalAtWork</author>
	<datestamp>1258748280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People are more compelled to chuck a netbook into their backpack, and take it places where they wouldn't take a laptop.  It probably sees more general abuse because it feels less delicate and more like a toy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People are more compelled to chuck a netbook into their backpack , and take it places where they would n't take a laptop .
It probably sees more general abuse because it feels less delicate and more like a toy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People are more compelled to chuck a netbook into their backpack, and take it places where they wouldn't take a laptop.
It probably sees more general abuse because it feels less delicate and more like a toy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174814</id>
	<title>What's the Math on These Failure Rates?</title>
	<author>mpapet</author>
	<datestamp>1258746480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are squaretrade, the independent warranty provider,  does their business model work at these failure rates?  I was too lazy to go figure out what SquareTrade would do with a laptop that qualifies for their warranty coverage.</p><p>If they replace it, it seems to me these failure rates would bust their business compared to the price of the warranty.  Maybe it's like American Health Insurance.  It looks like it provides protection, but the details say otherwise.</p><p>I could be totally wrong though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are squaretrade , the independent warranty provider , does their business model work at these failure rates ?
I was too lazy to go figure out what SquareTrade would do with a laptop that qualifies for their warranty coverage.If they replace it , it seems to me these failure rates would bust their business compared to the price of the warranty .
Maybe it 's like American Health Insurance .
It looks like it provides protection , but the details say otherwise.I could be totally wrong though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are squaretrade, the independent warranty provider,  does their business model work at these failure rates?
I was too lazy to go figure out what SquareTrade would do with a laptop that qualifies for their warranty coverage.If they replace it, it seems to me these failure rates would bust their business compared to the price of the warranty.
Maybe it's like American Health Insurance.
It looks like it provides protection, but the details say otherwise.I could be totally wrong though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30184588</id>
	<title>Re:HP was the worst - I can tell the same</title>
	<author>soupforare</author>
	<datestamp>1258821420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pretty much the whole DV line top to bottom was a mess.  I see them rather often with power issues, dead/dying motherboards, dead mini-pcie slots, dead backlights, the DC jacks are held on with spit and hope.  I know there's an extended support advisory for some of the models but out of the hundred+ I've checked only a few were on the list.<br>I know nvidia problems didn't help HP over the last few years, but there's too many non-video/chipset related problems for me to just blame nvidia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty much the whole DV line top to bottom was a mess .
I see them rather often with power issues , dead/dying motherboards , dead mini-pcie slots , dead backlights , the DC jacks are held on with spit and hope .
I know there 's an extended support advisory for some of the models but out of the hundred + I 've checked only a few were on the list.I know nvidia problems did n't help HP over the last few years , but there 's too many non-video/chipset related problems for me to just blame nvidia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty much the whole DV line top to bottom was a mess.
I see them rather often with power issues, dead/dying motherboards, dead mini-pcie slots, dead backlights, the DC jacks are held on with spit and hope.
I know there's an extended support advisory for some of the models but out of the hundred+ I've checked only a few were on the list.I know nvidia problems didn't help HP over the last few years, but there's too many non-video/chipset related problems for me to just blame nvidia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175640</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258749120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>anyone from being real competition that might try to compete with build quality</p></div><p>Right, just like the PC manufacturers who compete on build quality: they try to build the lowest quality machine they can, to price it as low as possible!</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the reason you'll never see authorized Mac clones</p></div><p>... is among other things the technical fact that the overwhelming majority of Windows reliability issues stem from driver problems due to the variety of supported hardware.  By limiting the available hardware Apple improves the reliability of their software.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Their entire business model is to sell you the new shiny</p></div><p>I don't know if it's their *entire* business model, but they are definitely pretty.  As if aesthetics were a bad thing!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>anyone from being real competition that might try to compete with build qualityRight , just like the PC manufacturers who compete on build quality : they try to build the lowest quality machine they can , to price it as low as possible ! the reason you 'll never see authorized Mac clones... is among other things the technical fact that the overwhelming majority of Windows reliability issues stem from driver problems due to the variety of supported hardware .
By limiting the available hardware Apple improves the reliability of their software.Their entire business model is to sell you the new shinyI do n't know if it 's their * entire * business model , but they are definitely pretty .
As if aesthetics were a bad thing !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>anyone from being real competition that might try to compete with build qualityRight, just like the PC manufacturers who compete on build quality: they try to build the lowest quality machine they can, to price it as low as possible!the reason you'll never see authorized Mac clones... is among other things the technical fact that the overwhelming majority of Windows reliability issues stem from driver problems due to the variety of supported hardware.
By limiting the available hardware Apple improves the reliability of their software.Their entire business model is to sell you the new shinyI don't know if it's their *entire* business model, but they are definitely pretty.
As if aesthetics were a bad thing!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174800</id>
	<title>Jive with anyone else's experience.</title>
	<author>MSG</author>
	<datestamp>1258746420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I saw this the other day.  What struck me most is that Sony and Apple have historically had the highest failure rates in the industry (maybe other than HP), and Dell has had among the lowest.  Toshiba appears to have consistently low failure rates.  I'm glad to see that Apple and Sony have improved (assuming the accuracy of the report), and very disappointed at Dell's slide.</p><p>Still, as an IT support guy, those numbers don't jive with what I see.  Apple laptops need warranty service far more often than this study indicates, in my experience.  I'd like to know more about the methodology of the survey.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw this the other day .
What struck me most is that Sony and Apple have historically had the highest failure rates in the industry ( maybe other than HP ) , and Dell has had among the lowest .
Toshiba appears to have consistently low failure rates .
I 'm glad to see that Apple and Sony have improved ( assuming the accuracy of the report ) , and very disappointed at Dell 's slide.Still , as an IT support guy , those numbers do n't jive with what I see .
Apple laptops need warranty service far more often than this study indicates , in my experience .
I 'd like to know more about the methodology of the survey .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw this the other day.
What struck me most is that Sony and Apple have historically had the highest failure rates in the industry (maybe other than HP), and Dell has had among the lowest.
Toshiba appears to have consistently low failure rates.
I'm glad to see that Apple and Sony have improved (assuming the accuracy of the report), and very disappointed at Dell's slide.Still, as an IT support guy, those numbers don't jive with what I see.
Apple laptops need warranty service far more often than this study indicates, in my experience.
I'd like to know more about the methodology of the survey.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30182082</id>
	<title>100\% Failure Rate with Apple MacOS</title>
	<author>Brett Glass</author>
	<datestamp>1258740240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately, Atom-based Netbooks have a 100\% failure rate with the latest updates to "Snow Leopard."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-S</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , Atom-based Netbooks have a 100 \ % failure rate with the latest updates to " Snow Leopard .
" : -S</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, Atom-based Netbooks have a 100\% failure rate with the latest updates to "Snow Leopard.
" :-S</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178212</id>
	<title>Re:Aha!</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1258714860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please bear in mind that most of these 'malfunctions' are actually engineering recalls for things like defective hinges or the LCD latch not operating properly. Most of the hardware inside an HP is pretty solid for the most part. Just speaking as a former insider.</p><p>Last MAJOR mass failure from HP was due to nVidia's faulty die packaging combined with cheap thermal modules failing. Instant GPU meltdown.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please bear in mind that most of these 'malfunctions ' are actually engineering recalls for things like defective hinges or the LCD latch not operating properly .
Most of the hardware inside an HP is pretty solid for the most part .
Just speaking as a former insider.Last MAJOR mass failure from HP was due to nVidia 's faulty die packaging combined with cheap thermal modules failing .
Instant GPU meltdown .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please bear in mind that most of these 'malfunctions' are actually engineering recalls for things like defective hinges or the LCD latch not operating properly.
Most of the hardware inside an HP is pretty solid for the most part.
Just speaking as a former insider.Last MAJOR mass failure from HP was due to nVidia's faulty die packaging combined with cheap thermal modules failing.
Instant GPU meltdown.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175598</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1258749000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Very often a less expensive product is indeed equal or even superior to the more expensive one. Whenever anyone says "you get what you pay for," hold on to your wallet. You usually pay for what you get, but you don't always get what you pay for.</p><p>Generic naproxen sodium costs 1/4 as much as Aleve, but they are identical except for price. Only fools waste their money on brand name drugs when there is a generic equivalent; naproxin is naproxin regardless of whose brand is on the bottle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Very often a less expensive product is indeed equal or even superior to the more expensive one .
Whenever anyone says " you get what you pay for , " hold on to your wallet .
You usually pay for what you get , but you do n't always get what you pay for.Generic naproxen sodium costs 1/4 as much as Aleve , but they are identical except for price .
Only fools waste their money on brand name drugs when there is a generic equivalent ; naproxin is naproxin regardless of whose brand is on the bottle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very often a less expensive product is indeed equal or even superior to the more expensive one.
Whenever anyone says "you get what you pay for," hold on to your wallet.
You usually pay for what you get, but you don't always get what you pay for.Generic naproxen sodium costs 1/4 as much as Aleve, but they are identical except for price.
Only fools waste their money on brand name drugs when there is a generic equivalent; naproxin is naproxin regardless of whose brand is on the bottle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174880</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258746780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>especially laptops with things like weak power plugs breaking off at the motherboard requiring a full main board replacement.</p></div></blockquote><p>Mac laptops don't have "power plugs" attached to their mainboard-- they all use MagSafe adapters which suffer extremely little wear and tear.  And the new unibody laptops are extremely rigid construction.  I'm not sure your information is up-to-date...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>especially laptops with things like weak power plugs breaking off at the motherboard requiring a full main board replacement.Mac laptops do n't have " power plugs " attached to their mainboard-- they all use MagSafe adapters which suffer extremely little wear and tear .
And the new unibody laptops are extremely rigid construction .
I 'm not sure your information is up-to-date.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>especially laptops with things like weak power plugs breaking off at the motherboard requiring a full main board replacement.Mac laptops don't have "power plugs" attached to their mainboard-- they all use MagSafe adapters which suffer extremely little wear and tear.
And the new unibody laptops are extremely rigid construction.
I'm not sure your information is up-to-date...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175858</id>
	<title>Re:What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>abigor</author>
	<datestamp>1258749840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The angry anti-Mac people are a funny bunch.</p><p>I use my Mac every day so I can work with Windows networks, Linux servers, and lots of code. And guess what? No problems at all. So my anecdotal evidence beats yours, I guess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The angry anti-Mac people are a funny bunch.I use my Mac every day so I can work with Windows networks , Linux servers , and lots of code .
And guess what ?
No problems at all .
So my anecdotal evidence beats yours , I guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The angry anti-Mac people are a funny bunch.I use my Mac every day so I can work with Windows networks, Linux servers, and lots of code.
And guess what?
No problems at all.
So my anecdotal evidence beats yours, I guess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178698</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>simplexion</author>
	<datestamp>1258716600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would also say that a lot more children are given netbooks over laptops.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would also say that a lot more children are given netbooks over laptops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would also say that a lot more children are given netbooks over laptops.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175276</id>
	<title>Extended warranties cause failures</title>
	<author>thethibs</author>
	<datestamp>1258747920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What these people fail to understand is that buying an extended warranty causes failures. I never buy the extended warranty and my gadgets experience negligible failure rates. The last thing I've had fail was a 12 year-old TV set.</p><p>The alternate explanation is that people who buy extended warranties are people whose experience indicate that it's a good investment--the klutzes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What these people fail to understand is that buying an extended warranty causes failures .
I never buy the extended warranty and my gadgets experience negligible failure rates .
The last thing I 've had fail was a 12 year-old TV set.The alternate explanation is that people who buy extended warranties are people whose experience indicate that it 's a good investment--the klutzes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What these people fail to understand is that buying an extended warranty causes failures.
I never buy the extended warranty and my gadgets experience negligible failure rates.
The last thing I've had fail was a 12 year-old TV set.The alternate explanation is that people who buy extended warranties are people whose experience indicate that it's a good investment--the klutzes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177682</id>
	<title>So what it all says is</title>
	<author>Pop69</author>
	<datestamp>1258713060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>even if you buy an Asus about 1 in 6 of them will fail within 3 years ?

<br> <br>

Why is the headline not laptop QA standards are so shit 1 in 6 fail within 3 years ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>even if you buy an Asus about 1 in 6 of them will fail within 3 years ?
Why is the headline not laptop QA standards are so shit 1 in 6 fail within 3 years ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>even if you buy an Asus about 1 in 6 of them will fail within 3 years ?
Why is the headline not laptop QA standards are so shit 1 in 6 fail within 3 years ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30182482</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>garry\_g</author>
	<datestamp>1258746720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As for Mac notebooks - we have a total of 5 in our company as of current, all 2 years old or newer (rest is Dell Notebooks, and I have a Samsung NC10 additionally)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... of those 5 Macs, three have had at least minor problems, including some display problems on of them (the newest one, incidentally)<br>Over the last ~5 years, we've had about 20+ Dell notebooks, for which we've had about 2 or 3 support calls, all of which were fixed on-site at our company (in contrast to the Mac problems, which all had to be sent off<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... not sure if there's a decent, affordable on-site service available)<br>So much for "more expensive is better quality" - all of the Macs were significantly more expensive than same-performance (as far as Hardware goes) Dells<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>Oh, and no problem with my Samsung to date, and I carry it back and forth with me every day<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As for Mac notebooks - we have a total of 5 in our company as of current , all 2 years old or newer ( rest is Dell Notebooks , and I have a Samsung NC10 additionally ) ... of those 5 Macs , three have had at least minor problems , including some display problems on of them ( the newest one , incidentally ) Over the last ~ 5 years , we 've had about 20 + Dell notebooks , for which we 've had about 2 or 3 support calls , all of which were fixed on-site at our company ( in contrast to the Mac problems , which all had to be sent off ... not sure if there 's a decent , affordable on-site service available ) So much for " more expensive is better quality " - all of the Macs were significantly more expensive than same-performance ( as far as Hardware goes ) Dells ...Oh , and no problem with my Samsung to date , and I carry it back and forth with me every day .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As for Mac notebooks - we have a total of 5 in our company as of current, all 2 years old or newer (rest is Dell Notebooks, and I have a Samsung NC10 additionally) ... of those 5 Macs, three have had at least minor problems, including some display problems on of them (the newest one, incidentally)Over the last ~5 years, we've had about 20+ Dell notebooks, for which we've had about 2 or 3 support calls, all of which were fixed on-site at our company (in contrast to the Mac problems, which all had to be sent off ... not sure if there's a decent, affordable on-site service available)So much for "more expensive is better quality" - all of the Macs were significantly more expensive than same-performance (as far as Hardware goes) Dells ...Oh, and no problem with my Samsung to date, and I carry it back and forth with me every day ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30180204</id>
	<title>Panasonic...</title>
	<author>marciot</author>
	<datestamp>1258723800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We need a Panasonic ToughNetBook... you know, a mil-spec hardened netbook, available only in camouflage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We need a Panasonic ToughNetBook... you know , a mil-spec hardened netbook , available only in camouflage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need a Panasonic ToughNetBook... you know, a mil-spec hardened netbook, available only in camouflage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768</id>
	<title>What "legendary reliability of Macs"?</title>
	<author>Zenin</author>
	<datestamp>1258746360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Practically everyone I've ever known with a Mac has had major hardware issues with it, especially laptops with things like weak power plugs breaking off at the motherboard requiring a full main board replacement.</p><p>Apple's service has always seemed outstanding, issues get resolved well and quickly, but the basic hardware... When there's a choice to be made between looks and function or reliability, Apple takes looks each and every time.  Apple sells style, not quality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Practically everyone I 've ever known with a Mac has had major hardware issues with it , especially laptops with things like weak power plugs breaking off at the motherboard requiring a full main board replacement.Apple 's service has always seemed outstanding , issues get resolved well and quickly , but the basic hardware... When there 's a choice to be made between looks and function or reliability , Apple takes looks each and every time .
Apple sells style , not quality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Practically everyone I've ever known with a Mac has had major hardware issues with it, especially laptops with things like weak power plugs breaking off at the motherboard requiring a full main board replacement.Apple's service has always seemed outstanding, issues get resolved well and quickly, but the basic hardware... When there's a choice to be made between looks and function or reliability, Apple takes looks each and every time.
Apple sells style, not quality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178494</id>
	<title>Re:Correlation != Causality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258715880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe the failure rate on my Apple products to be acceptable due to the nature of how Apple handles said failures. No phone calls to $Foreign\_Country, waiting for shipping package, mailing... etc. I walk in, I complain, they fix. If they can't fix on the spot, they send away and I usually walk out with a "loaner". Works for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the failure rate on my Apple products to be acceptable due to the nature of how Apple handles said failures .
No phone calls to $ Foreign \ _Country , waiting for shipping package , mailing... etc. I walk in , I complain , they fix .
If they ca n't fix on the spot , they send away and I usually walk out with a " loaner " .
Works for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the failure rate on my Apple products to be acceptable due to the nature of how Apple handles said failures.
No phone calls to $Foreign\_Country, waiting for shipping package, mailing... etc. I walk in, I complain, they fix.
If they can't fix on the spot, they send away and I usually walk out with a "loaner".
Works for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174568</id>
	<title>ASUS Will reliably run your crapware...</title>
	<author>nkcaump</author>
	<datestamp>1258745760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ASUS will run your bloatware and crapware for longer than other systems.  Good to know.</htmltext>
<tokenext>ASUS will run your bloatware and crapware for longer than other systems .
Good to know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ASUS will run your bloatware and crapware for longer than other systems.
Good to know.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175408</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>hrimhari</author>
	<datestamp>1258748460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's right. If you pay 300\% more, it will be 1.6\% less likely to break in the first year. A bargain!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's right .
If you pay 300 \ % more , it will be 1.6 \ % less likely to break in the first year .
A bargain !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's right.
If you pay 300\% more, it will be 1.6\% less likely to break in the first year.
A bargain!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175440</id>
	<title>Sample Data?</title>
	<author>RevWaldo</author>
	<datestamp>1258748520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The sample data is based on laptops using SquareTrade's extended warranty coverage. What's the profile of SquareTrade users?<br> <br>
I was surprised by Levono's ranking (6th) since ThinkPads usually have a solid reputation which makes them popular among corporate users.<br> <br>
I'm thinking that if SquareTrade's audience is nearly all consumers, the sample for Levono may be relatively quite small.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The sample data is based on laptops using SquareTrade 's extended warranty coverage .
What 's the profile of SquareTrade users ?
I was surprised by Levono 's ranking ( 6th ) since ThinkPads usually have a solid reputation which makes them popular among corporate users .
I 'm thinking that if SquareTrade 's audience is nearly all consumers , the sample for Levono may be relatively quite small .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sample data is based on laptops using SquareTrade's extended warranty coverage.
What's the profile of SquareTrade users?
I was surprised by Levono's ranking (6th) since ThinkPads usually have a solid reputation which makes them popular among corporate users.
I'm thinking that if SquareTrade's audience is nearly all consumers, the sample for Levono may be relatively quite small.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175798</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258749660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe it's because Netbook motherboards have holes... <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MSI\_Wind\_MB1.jpg" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MSI\_Wind\_MB1.jpg</a> [wikipedia.org]</p> </div><p>Those are speed holes.  They make the netbook run faster.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it 's because Netbook motherboards have holes... http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File : MSI \ _Wind \ _MB1.jpg [ wikipedia.org ] Those are speed holes .
They make the netbook run faster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it's because Netbook motherboards have holes... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MSI\_Wind\_MB1.jpg [wikipedia.org] Those are speed holes.
They make the netbook run faster.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175244</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176942</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>Laurence0</author>
	<datestamp>1258710540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not so sure about that - my experience is that bigger things get bashed around more than small things...</p><p>My company produces two kits which are relatively similar in function, however one has around 8kg of lead acid batteries in, the other around 500g of lithium ion. The two kits have identical connectors on the outside, however the bigger ones come back with smashed connectors much much more often than the smaller ones. I think it's probably down to momentum - both kits get chucked onto tables, shelves and into car boots in a similar way, but the heavier one has enough mass behind it to do more damage when it hits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not so sure about that - my experience is that bigger things get bashed around more than small things...My company produces two kits which are relatively similar in function , however one has around 8kg of lead acid batteries in , the other around 500g of lithium ion .
The two kits have identical connectors on the outside , however the bigger ones come back with smashed connectors much much more often than the smaller ones .
I think it 's probably down to momentum - both kits get chucked onto tables , shelves and into car boots in a similar way , but the heavier one has enough mass behind it to do more damage when it hits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not so sure about that - my experience is that bigger things get bashed around more than small things...My company produces two kits which are relatively similar in function, however one has around 8kg of lead acid batteries in, the other around 500g of lithium ion.
The two kits have identical connectors on the outside, however the bigger ones come back with smashed connectors much much more often than the smaller ones.
I think it's probably down to momentum - both kits get chucked onto tables, shelves and into car boots in a similar way, but the heavier one has enough mass behind it to do more damage when it hits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178564</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper = Worse?</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1258716120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, considering most Asus laptops are 1/2 the price of a MacBookPro....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , considering most Asus laptops are 1/2 the price of a MacBookPro... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, considering most Asus laptops are 1/2 the price of a MacBookPro....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174600</id>
	<title>You think?</title>
	<author>Microlith</author>
	<datestamp>1258745880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering how cheap they are I'm  not surprised. My Aspire One's fan unit failed within the first 5 months and (since I voided the warranty) I can't get service on it. I tried to find a replacement heatsink/fan unit, unfortunately the only suppliers I could find wanted $90 for the damned thing.</p><p>Speaking of which, anyone here know where I could get one (or at least, a 30x30x7 (mm))? Surely Slashdot has people in the know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering how cheap they are I 'm not surprised .
My Aspire One 's fan unit failed within the first 5 months and ( since I voided the warranty ) I ca n't get service on it .
I tried to find a replacement heatsink/fan unit , unfortunately the only suppliers I could find wanted $ 90 for the damned thing.Speaking of which , anyone here know where I could get one ( or at least , a 30x30x7 ( mm ) ) ?
Surely Slashdot has people in the know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering how cheap they are I'm  not surprised.
My Aspire One's fan unit failed within the first 5 months and (since I voided the warranty) I can't get service on it.
I tried to find a replacement heatsink/fan unit, unfortunately the only suppliers I could find wanted $90 for the damned thing.Speaking of which, anyone here know where I could get one (or at least, a 30x30x7 (mm))?
Surely Slashdot has people in the know.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174560</id>
	<title>And?</title>
	<author>Aphoxema</author>
	<datestamp>1258745760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes insightful looks into popular things really makes me sit back and think...</p><p>This just makes me say, "So what?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes insightful looks into popular things really makes me sit back and think...This just makes me say , " So what ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes insightful looks into popular things really makes me sit back and think...This just makes me say, "So what?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178568
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30183458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30183430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30182482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30184588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30182396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174684
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30182960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30179256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30180168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30180672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30179024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30179242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30187360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30180384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_1527257_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174590
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174690
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175562
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30179242
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30182396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174790
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174720
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176500
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174924
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174688
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175486
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175500
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178568
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175910
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181830
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175630
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174814
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175054
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175640
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175042
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175728
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176596
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30183430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174880
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175976
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175288
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175432
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175094
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175162
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175422
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175406
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30182960
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30180384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175104
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176050
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181160
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178494
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30183458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175538
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175244
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30180168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30182482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30187360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175044
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175600
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175782
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178698
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30179256
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177420
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176942
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175352
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30177248
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30181046
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30180672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174722
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30179024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176504
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30184588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30178358
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30176882
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_1527257.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30174600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_1527257.30175498
</commentlist>
</conversation>
