<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_20_2048235</id>
	<title>Firefox 3.5 Now the Most Popular Browser Worldwide</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1261316160000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>gQuigs notes a graph up at StatCounter Global Statistics, which shows that in the last few days <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser\_version-ww-weekly-200827-200951">Firefox 3.5 became the most used browser version</a> worldwide, edging ahead of IE7. IE8 is rising fast (along with Windows 7), but over the last few months the slope of Firefox's worldwide curve has been steeper. (In the US, IE8 has always been ahead of Firefox 3.5; in Europe Firefox has led since late summer.) The submitter suggests using the time when Firefox rules the roost, globally speaking, to <a href="http://www.ie6nomore.com/">put the final nail in the coffin of IE6</a>, which still has a 14\% global share (5\%-7\% in the US and EU; China and Korea are holding up IE6's numbers).</htmltext>
<tokenext>gQuigs notes a graph up at StatCounter Global Statistics , which shows that in the last few days Firefox 3.5 became the most used browser version worldwide , edging ahead of IE7 .
IE8 is rising fast ( along with Windows 7 ) , but over the last few months the slope of Firefox 's worldwide curve has been steeper .
( In the US , IE8 has always been ahead of Firefox 3.5 ; in Europe Firefox has led since late summer .
) The submitter suggests using the time when Firefox rules the roost , globally speaking , to put the final nail in the coffin of IE6 , which still has a 14 \ % global share ( 5 \ % -7 \ % in the US and EU ; China and Korea are holding up IE6 's numbers ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>gQuigs notes a graph up at StatCounter Global Statistics, which shows that in the last few days Firefox 3.5 became the most used browser version worldwide, edging ahead of IE7.
IE8 is rising fast (along with Windows 7), but over the last few months the slope of Firefox's worldwide curve has been steeper.
(In the US, IE8 has always been ahead of Firefox 3.5; in Europe Firefox has led since late summer.
) The submitter suggests using the time when Firefox rules the roost, globally speaking, to put the final nail in the coffin of IE6, which still has a 14\% global share (5\%-7\% in the US and EU; China and Korea are holding up IE6's numbers).</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508604</id>
	<title>IE8 displacing older versions!</title>
	<author>dowlingw</author>
	<datestamp>1261325280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You need to look at the trends for IE7 and IE8, it looks like the market share is trending towards upgrades from IE7 to IE8, just like how Firefox 3 lost share at around the same rate as Firefox 3.5 gained share. Going by this, you'll see that IE8 is going to head straight back up to around the 40\% mark.

Which, all things considered is GREAT news - IE8 is a much better browser as far as standards-compliancy is concerned and it means the web is on it's way to being a much more stable platform, rah rah rah.

Also interesting, check the decline in IE6 also - I wonder if IE6 users are flocking to IE8 also - maybe IE8 will end up with ~60\% market share?

No matter what happens, less IE7 and IE6 = WIN.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You need to look at the trends for IE7 and IE8 , it looks like the market share is trending towards upgrades from IE7 to IE8 , just like how Firefox 3 lost share at around the same rate as Firefox 3.5 gained share .
Going by this , you 'll see that IE8 is going to head straight back up to around the 40 \ % mark .
Which , all things considered is GREAT news - IE8 is a much better browser as far as standards-compliancy is concerned and it means the web is on it 's way to being a much more stable platform , rah rah rah .
Also interesting , check the decline in IE6 also - I wonder if IE6 users are flocking to IE8 also - maybe IE8 will end up with ~ 60 \ % market share ?
No matter what happens , less IE7 and IE6 = WIN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need to look at the trends for IE7 and IE8, it looks like the market share is trending towards upgrades from IE7 to IE8, just like how Firefox 3 lost share at around the same rate as Firefox 3.5 gained share.
Going by this, you'll see that IE8 is going to head straight back up to around the 40\% mark.
Which, all things considered is GREAT news - IE8 is a much better browser as far as standards-compliancy is concerned and it means the web is on it's way to being a much more stable platform, rah rah rah.
Also interesting, check the decline in IE6 also - I wonder if IE6 users are flocking to IE8 also - maybe IE8 will end up with ~60\% market share?
No matter what happens, less IE7 and IE6 = WIN.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30514754</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261423380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>careful, they'll start trying to play the "what's that colour" game!  Grrrr @ non-colourblind people<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>careful , they 'll start trying to play the " what 's that colour " game !
Grrrr @ non-colourblind people : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>careful, they'll start trying to play the "what's that colour" game!
Grrrr @ non-colourblind people :P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509938</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1261387200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From an implementors side of view, supporting IE6 and IE7 and IE8 is like supporting three entirely different browsers.<br>While IE8 is mostly just as Fox to support, keep the standards up and it should run with  minimal fixes, IE6 and 7 are entirely different beasts, IE6 is a bugridden hellhole, IE7 fixes some of those bugs and introduces others while pulling away certain hacks which made IE6 somewhat compliant.</p><p>So supporting Firefox Safari IE8 Opera etc... is mostly just doing one browser with a few lines of fixing, doing the rest of the bunch is like doing something completely different.</p><p>I would not put IE marketsharewise into one pot, because you basically blur the real actual development costs I would say the support of IE6 raises the actual development cost of the guy doing the frontend depending on the complexity of the site from 10-20\% (with numbers rising depending on how much dynamic stuff you want in), IE7 is around 5-15\% raise in development cost.<br>While you can push Opera Safari, Firefox (3.x that is 2, is by now neglectable) and IE8 into one pot if you code after CSS 2.1 and do not to too much nasty tricks, into a 1-3\% pot!</p><p>So you see the question arises outside of the stupidity of putting all IEs together, which is just branding but not the actual situation, does the marketshare of a single IE version (namel 6) justify 10\% more development time for the frontend. IE6 and 7 combined maybe but IE6 alone, the customer has to pay for that extra, period!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From an implementors side of view , supporting IE6 and IE7 and IE8 is like supporting three entirely different browsers.While IE8 is mostly just as Fox to support , keep the standards up and it should run with minimal fixes , IE6 and 7 are entirely different beasts , IE6 is a bugridden hellhole , IE7 fixes some of those bugs and introduces others while pulling away certain hacks which made IE6 somewhat compliant.So supporting Firefox Safari IE8 Opera etc... is mostly just doing one browser with a few lines of fixing , doing the rest of the bunch is like doing something completely different.I would not put IE marketsharewise into one pot , because you basically blur the real actual development costs I would say the support of IE6 raises the actual development cost of the guy doing the frontend depending on the complexity of the site from 10-20 \ % ( with numbers rising depending on how much dynamic stuff you want in ) , IE7 is around 5-15 \ % raise in development cost.While you can push Opera Safari , Firefox ( 3.x that is 2 , is by now neglectable ) and IE8 into one pot if you code after CSS 2.1 and do not to too much nasty tricks , into a 1-3 \ % pot ! So you see the question arises outside of the stupidity of putting all IEs together , which is just branding but not the actual situation , does the marketshare of a single IE version ( namel 6 ) justify 10 \ % more development time for the frontend .
IE6 and 7 combined maybe but IE6 alone , the customer has to pay for that extra , period !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From an implementors side of view, supporting IE6 and IE7 and IE8 is like supporting three entirely different browsers.While IE8 is mostly just as Fox to support, keep the standards up and it should run with  minimal fixes, IE6 and 7 are entirely different beasts, IE6 is a bugridden hellhole, IE7 fixes some of those bugs and introduces others while pulling away certain hacks which made IE6 somewhat compliant.So supporting Firefox Safari IE8 Opera etc... is mostly just doing one browser with a few lines of fixing, doing the rest of the bunch is like doing something completely different.I would not put IE marketsharewise into one pot, because you basically blur the real actual development costs I would say the support of IE6 raises the actual development cost of the guy doing the frontend depending on the complexity of the site from 10-20\% (with numbers rising depending on how much dynamic stuff you want in), IE7 is around 5-15\% raise in development cost.While you can push Opera Safari, Firefox (3.x that is 2, is by now neglectable) and IE8 into one pot if you code after CSS 2.1 and do not to too much nasty tricks, into a 1-3\% pot!So you see the question arises outside of the stupidity of putting all IEs together, which is just branding but not the actual situation, does the marketshare of a single IE version (namel 6) justify 10\% more development time for the frontend.
IE6 and 7 combined maybe but IE6 alone, the customer has to pay for that extra, period!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510170</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>nyctopterus</author>
	<datestamp>1261391400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is it good new for Firefox?  I think it's more good news for all alternate browsers as a whole.  We're almost back to where we were around 2000 where there were many different browsers in use before IE sewed up the market for half a decade.</p></div><p>Anecdotally, I've found this to be true. Back in 2006-7, I was still coming across sites that were buggy or didn't really work at all in anything but IE. I haven't hit anything like that in a couple of years. Every site appears to be tested for Firefox, and therefore will work in all the standards-based browsers (small quirks aside).</p><p>This might also be attributable to the rise in Mac usage--if you're on a Mac, you can't just launch IE because a page doesn't work in your browser of choice (VMs excepted, but I'm not launching a VM just to look at some stupid website). Shutting out Mac users used to mean shutting out a tiny percentage of weirdos, now it's more akin to shutting out the richest tenth of your potential customers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it good new for Firefox ?
I think it 's more good news for all alternate browsers as a whole .
We 're almost back to where we were around 2000 where there were many different browsers in use before IE sewed up the market for half a decade.Anecdotally , I 've found this to be true .
Back in 2006-7 , I was still coming across sites that were buggy or did n't really work at all in anything but IE .
I have n't hit anything like that in a couple of years .
Every site appears to be tested for Firefox , and therefore will work in all the standards-based browsers ( small quirks aside ) .This might also be attributable to the rise in Mac usage--if you 're on a Mac , you ca n't just launch IE because a page does n't work in your browser of choice ( VMs excepted , but I 'm not launching a VM just to look at some stupid website ) .
Shutting out Mac users used to mean shutting out a tiny percentage of weirdos , now it 's more akin to shutting out the richest tenth of your potential customers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it good new for Firefox?
I think it's more good news for all alternate browsers as a whole.
We're almost back to where we were around 2000 where there were many different browsers in use before IE sewed up the market for half a decade.Anecdotally, I've found this to be true.
Back in 2006-7, I was still coming across sites that were buggy or didn't really work at all in anything but IE.
I haven't hit anything like that in a couple of years.
Every site appears to be tested for Firefox, and therefore will work in all the standards-based browsers (small quirks aside).This might also be attributable to the rise in Mac usage--if you're on a Mac, you can't just launch IE because a page doesn't work in your browser of choice (VMs excepted, but I'm not launching a VM just to look at some stupid website).
Shutting out Mac users used to mean shutting out a tiny percentage of weirdos, now it's more akin to shutting out the richest tenth of your potential customers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508546</id>
	<title>Dammit!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261324440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now I have to find a new browser. I can't use popular software or else my nerd cred goes down!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I have to find a new browser .
I ca n't use popular software or else my nerd cred goes down !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I have to find a new browser.
I can't use popular software or else my nerd cred goes down!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511570</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>houghi</author>
	<datestamp>1261408020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Corporate Intranets with no budget for upgrades are what keeps IE6 alive.</p></div></blockquote><p>It is the lack of budget that forced us to think of an intranet that was accesible for all browsers now and in the forseeable future. It also is the reason we go 100\% open source.<br>This because we learned that it will cost in the end more if we don't.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporate Intranets with no budget for upgrades are what keeps IE6 alive.It is the lack of budget that forced us to think of an intranet that was accesible for all browsers now and in the forseeable future .
It also is the reason we go 100 \ % open source.This because we learned that it will cost in the end more if we do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporate Intranets with no budget for upgrades are what keeps IE6 alive.It is the lack of budget that forced us to think of an intranet that was accesible for all browsers now and in the forseeable future.
It also is the reason we go 100\% open source.This because we learned that it will cost in the end more if we don't.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509856</id>
	<title>more of the same lies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261386060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok did anyone follow the link? Clearly IE7 is still the most used browser world wide! Stop spreading lies. I use Firefox 100\% but I am into spreading lies about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok did anyone follow the link ?
Clearly IE7 is still the most used browser world wide !
Stop spreading lies .
I use Firefox 100 \ % but I am into spreading lies about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok did anyone follow the link?
Clearly IE7 is still the most used browser world wide!
Stop spreading lies.
I use Firefox 100\% but I am into spreading lies about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509244</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>ydrol</author>
	<datestamp>1261332720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And make the browser launch as a limited user. Install PSexec and change all browser shorcuts to</p><p>psexec -d -l c:\Path\To\Browser.exe</p><p>Should really make the user a limited user, but then they moan they  can't use crappy  software like Kodak Easyshare etc and more ACL fun ensues.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And make the browser launch as a limited user .
Install PSexec and change all browser shorcuts topsexec -d -l c : \ Path \ To \ Browser.exeShould really make the user a limited user , but then they moan they ca n't use crappy software like Kodak Easyshare etc and more ACL fun ensues.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And make the browser launch as a limited user.
Install PSexec and change all browser shorcuts topsexec -d -l c:\Path\To\Browser.exeShould really make the user a limited user, but then they moan they  can't use crappy  software like Kodak Easyshare etc and more ACL fun ensues.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170</id>
	<title>IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>bguiz</author>
	<datestamp>1261320360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm finding it hard to believe that IE6 is stilling around at all... The only situation where I would use that junk is if I had a software lock-down at work....
</p><p>and even then I'd re-consider working there for being too archaic.
</p><p>Congratulations Firefox: It was just a matter of time before quality gets reflected in market shares!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm finding it hard to believe that IE6 is stilling around at all... The only situation where I would use that junk is if I had a software lock-down at work... . and even then I 'd re-consider working there for being too archaic .
Congratulations Firefox : It was just a matter of time before quality gets reflected in market shares !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm finding it hard to believe that IE6 is stilling around at all... The only situation where I would use that junk is if I had a software lock-down at work....
and even then I'd re-consider working there for being too archaic.
Congratulations Firefox: It was just a matter of time before quality gets reflected in market shares!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508282</id>
	<title>Re:This is silly...</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1261321560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not entirely, there is something interesting about the much faster adoption of new versions of Firefox (well, the apparent adoption of newer versions among users of older versions...).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not entirely , there is something interesting about the much faster adoption of new versions of Firefox ( well , the apparent adoption of newer versions among users of older versions... ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not entirely, there is something interesting about the much faster adoption of new versions of Firefox (well, the apparent adoption of newer versions among users of older versions...).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513676</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1261418640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS seem to have handled the 64bit thing very badly...</p><p>Run a 64bit browser but lose 99\% of third party plugins = noone will run the 64bit version...<br>OSX snow leopard has a 64bit safari build, and it runs with flash just fine, linux has native 64bit flash and a plugin wrapper..</p><p>OSX/Linux will let you use up to 64gb ram on a 32bit os, ms artificially restrict you unless you buy the expensive "enterprise server" version...</p><p>OSX will let you run a 32bit kernel with a 64bit userland incase your drivers aren't ported to 64bit yet...<br>Linux will let you use a 64bit kernel with a 32bit userland, or a mixed userland...</p><p>MS force you to use a 64bit kernel if you want a 64bit userland or support for more than 4gb of address space, but the 64bit kernel is often totally unusable if you don't have the drivers you need.. MS would have benefitted from doing what Apple did, Apple/Linux have less of an issue with drivers anyway because most come with source code enabling a 64bit recompile, or in the case of apple most of the hardware is supplied by them anyway.</p><p>64bit linux has made sense for years, 64bit osx is a pretty seamless transition for most osx users i know, and yet most windows users i know are actively avoiding 64bit or complaining about it if they're forced to use it (eg lots of memory)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS seem to have handled the 64bit thing very badly...Run a 64bit browser but lose 99 \ % of third party plugins = noone will run the 64bit version...OSX snow leopard has a 64bit safari build , and it runs with flash just fine , linux has native 64bit flash and a plugin wrapper..OSX/Linux will let you use up to 64gb ram on a 32bit os , ms artificially restrict you unless you buy the expensive " enterprise server " version...OSX will let you run a 32bit kernel with a 64bit userland incase your drivers are n't ported to 64bit yet...Linux will let you use a 64bit kernel with a 32bit userland , or a mixed userland...MS force you to use a 64bit kernel if you want a 64bit userland or support for more than 4gb of address space , but the 64bit kernel is often totally unusable if you do n't have the drivers you need.. MS would have benefitted from doing what Apple did , Apple/Linux have less of an issue with drivers anyway because most come with source code enabling a 64bit recompile , or in the case of apple most of the hardware is supplied by them anyway.64bit linux has made sense for years , 64bit osx is a pretty seamless transition for most osx users i know , and yet most windows users i know are actively avoiding 64bit or complaining about it if they 're forced to use it ( eg lots of memory )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS seem to have handled the 64bit thing very badly...Run a 64bit browser but lose 99\% of third party plugins = noone will run the 64bit version...OSX snow leopard has a 64bit safari build, and it runs with flash just fine, linux has native 64bit flash and a plugin wrapper..OSX/Linux will let you use up to 64gb ram on a 32bit os, ms artificially restrict you unless you buy the expensive "enterprise server" version...OSX will let you run a 32bit kernel with a 64bit userland incase your drivers aren't ported to 64bit yet...Linux will let you use a 64bit kernel with a 32bit userland, or a mixed userland...MS force you to use a 64bit kernel if you want a 64bit userland or support for more than 4gb of address space, but the 64bit kernel is often totally unusable if you don't have the drivers you need.. MS would have benefitted from doing what Apple did, Apple/Linux have less of an issue with drivers anyway because most come with source code enabling a 64bit recompile, or in the case of apple most of the hardware is supplied by them anyway.64bit linux has made sense for years, 64bit osx is a pretty seamless transition for most osx users i know, and yet most windows users i know are actively avoiding 64bit or complaining about it if they're forced to use it (eg lots of memory)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512218</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>uyguremre</author>
	<datestamp>1261411860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Let's give it between 3 and 5 years, alright?</p></div><p>When we add a liner trendline, it shows mid 2011 for firefox catching up with IE</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's give it between 3 and 5 years , alright ? When we add a liner trendline , it shows mid 2011 for firefox catching up with IE</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's give it between 3 and 5 years, alright?When we add a liner trendline, it shows mid 2011 for firefox catching up with IE
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509038</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>antdude</author>
	<datestamp>1261330260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS can update IE through its Automatic Updates and MS Updates, assuming they are enabled and used.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS can update IE through its Automatic Updates and MS Updates , assuming they are enabled and used .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS can update IE through its Automatic Updates and MS Updates, assuming they are enabled and used.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509492</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>mgblst</author>
	<datestamp>1261336320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are wrong. There are only four different browsers for web developers.</p><p>IE6, IE7, IE8 and all other standard compliant browswers.</p><p>I code for all other browsers, then check them out in ie6,7,8 and make adjustments.</p><p>Damn I hate ie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are wrong .
There are only four different browsers for web developers.IE6 , IE7 , IE8 and all other standard compliant browswers.I code for all other browsers , then check them out in ie6,7,8 and make adjustments.Damn I hate ie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are wrong.
There are only four different browsers for web developers.IE6, IE7, IE8 and all other standard compliant browswers.I code for all other browsers, then check them out in ie6,7,8 and make adjustments.Damn I hate ie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508628</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508940</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261329360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Firefox has a ways to go. <a href="http://yfrog.com/j5temptlp" title="yfrog.com" rel="nofollow">http://yfrog.com/j5temptlp</a> [yfrog.com] </p></div><p>I see. This is quite a find. We are now certain that Crayon DOES look bad on graphs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Firefox has a ways to go .
http : //yfrog.com/j5temptlp [ yfrog.com ] I see .
This is quite a find .
We are now certain that Crayon DOES look bad on graphs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Firefox has a ways to go.
http://yfrog.com/j5temptlp [yfrog.com] I see.
This is quite a find.
We are now certain that Crayon DOES look bad on graphs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511980</id>
	<title>Firefox / Windows 7</title>
	<author>C\_Kode</author>
	<datestamp>1261410420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've had more than a few desktops with issues of Firefox 3.5.x causing blue screens of death on Windows 7 64bit.  Not sure about other flavors of Windows 7.</p><p>Some Googling suggests it's a recent update with Firefox others suggest it's a Firefox / Flash issue.  Either way, I was forced to stop allowing the use of Firefox while this issue continues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had more than a few desktops with issues of Firefox 3.5.x causing blue screens of death on Windows 7 64bit .
Not sure about other flavors of Windows 7.Some Googling suggests it 's a recent update with Firefox others suggest it 's a Firefox / Flash issue .
Either way , I was forced to stop allowing the use of Firefox while this issue continues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had more than a few desktops with issues of Firefox 3.5.x causing blue screens of death on Windows 7 64bit.
Not sure about other flavors of Windows 7.Some Googling suggests it's a recent update with Firefox others suggest it's a Firefox / Flash issue.
Either way, I was forced to stop allowing the use of Firefox while this issue continues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30521740</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>komap</author>
	<datestamp>1261476840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's wrong with the statement?
Note, e.g., that much more than half of people have more than average number of legs.
Or just read about Simpson's paradox on wikipedia.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's wrong with the statement ?
Note , e.g. , that much more than half of people have more than average number of legs .
Or just read about Simpson 's paradox on wikipedia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's wrong with the statement?
Note, e.g., that much more than half of people have more than average number of legs.
Or just read about Simpson's paradox on wikipedia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190</id>
	<title>StatCounter?</title>
	<author>gzipped\_tar</author>
	<datestamp>1261320600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering most Firefox users are more tech savvy than average and many of them are likely to have already blocked StatCounter altogether, this is impressive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering most Firefox users are more tech savvy than average and many of them are likely to have already blocked StatCounter altogether , this is impressive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering most Firefox users are more tech savvy than average and many of them are likely to have already blocked StatCounter altogether, this is impressive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508292</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1261321620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Here's a plot (thankfully, they give out the raw CSV data) with the "all versions" included. Firefox has a ways to go. <a href="http://yfrog.com/j5temptlp" title="yfrog.com">http://yfrog.com/j5temptlp</a> [yfrog.com]</p></div> </blockquote><p>Statcounter <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951" title="statcounter.com">also plots that</a> [statcounter.com], fwiw. (Click on the dropdown box after "Statistic:" at the bottom-left of the graph to get other views and data sets as well.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a plot ( thankfully , they give out the raw CSV data ) with the " all versions " included .
Firefox has a ways to go .
http : //yfrog.com/j5temptlp [ yfrog.com ] Statcounter also plots that [ statcounter.com ] , fwiw .
( Click on the dropdown box after " Statistic : " at the bottom-left of the graph to get other views and data sets as well .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a plot (thankfully, they give out the raw CSV data) with the "all versions" included.
Firefox has a ways to go.
http://yfrog.com/j5temptlp [yfrog.com] Statcounter also plots that [statcounter.com], fwiw.
(Click on the dropdown box after "Statistic:" at the bottom-left of the graph to get other views and data sets as well.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510202</id>
	<title>Re:One word: adblock</title>
	<author>Randle\_Revar</author>
	<datestamp>1261391940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I allow ads on sites I frequent... except Slashdot. Slashdot has some of the worst behaved ads I have seen on a respectable site (well, aside from those bizarre double underlined link ads/searches/definitions, but noscript gets them). Even now<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. ads are blocked, just in case the "turn off ads" option goes away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I allow ads on sites I frequent... except Slashdot .
Slashdot has some of the worst behaved ads I have seen on a respectable site ( well , aside from those bizarre double underlined link ads/searches/definitions , but noscript gets them ) .
Even now / .
ads are blocked , just in case the " turn off ads " option goes away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I allow ads on sites I frequent... except Slashdot.
Slashdot has some of the worst behaved ads I have seen on a respectable site (well, aside from those bizarre double underlined link ads/searches/definitions, but noscript gets them).
Even now /.
ads are blocked, just in case the "turn off ads" option goes away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508710</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>Anpheus</author>
	<datestamp>1261326720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Add ADP's online timeclock solution to the list of idiotic web applications. It's just a dumb site with a button that you click on to click in and clock out, and they only support Firefox + IE and filter everything else by user agent. Google Chrome works fine, as does every other browser in the past decade, I'm sure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Add ADP 's online timeclock solution to the list of idiotic web applications .
It 's just a dumb site with a button that you click on to click in and clock out , and they only support Firefox + IE and filter everything else by user agent .
Google Chrome works fine , as does every other browser in the past decade , I 'm sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Add ADP's online timeclock solution to the list of idiotic web applications.
It's just a dumb site with a button that you click on to click in and clock out, and they only support Firefox + IE and filter everything else by user agent.
Google Chrome works fine, as does every other browser in the past decade, I'm sure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508882</id>
	<title>Re:What happened to Netcraft confirming it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261328880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Netcraft only deals with real data. Statistics that can be obtained reliably, you know. Web analytics, especially as in this case, are as far from that as you can get.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Netcraft only deals with real data .
Statistics that can be obtained reliably , you know .
Web analytics , especially as in this case , are as far from that as you can get .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Netcraft only deals with real data.
Statistics that can be obtained reliably, you know.
Web analytics, especially as in this case, are as far from that as you can get.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508748</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>jocabergs</author>
	<datestamp>1261327140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wish it were that easy, my mom still swears by AOL 8.0.  I feel violated whenever I have to fix her computer and despite the fact I've got a degree in IT and 10 years of work experience, I still can't convince her to upgrade... sigh... I need to upgrade to mom 2.0</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish it were that easy , my mom still swears by AOL 8.0 .
I feel violated whenever I have to fix her computer and despite the fact I 've got a degree in IT and 10 years of work experience , I still ca n't convince her to upgrade... sigh... I need to upgrade to mom 2.0</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish it were that easy, my mom still swears by AOL 8.0.
I feel violated whenever I have to fix her computer and despite the fact I've got a degree in IT and 10 years of work experience, I still can't convince her to upgrade... sigh... I need to upgrade to mom 2.0</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509722</id>
	<title>Since Firefox is going to be the new target....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261426740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess its time I switch to Opera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess its time I switch to Opera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess its time I switch to Opera.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508902</id>
	<title>Re:One word: adblock</title>
	<author>TheVelvetFlamebait</author>
	<datestamp>1261329060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I switched back from adblock (not from firefox). I felt too guilty. It seemed that the least I could do while using someone's page is allow their ads on screen (even if I don't look at them).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I switched back from adblock ( not from firefox ) .
I felt too guilty .
It seemed that the least I could do while using someone 's page is allow their ads on screen ( even if I do n't look at them ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I switched back from adblock (not from firefox).
I felt too guilty.
It seemed that the least I could do while using someone's page is allow their ads on screen (even if I don't look at them).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30526090</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261509060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You may not realize this, but extensions like Adblock aren't actually limited to ads...</p><p>There's also other extensions like RequestPolicy (look it up on AMO).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You may not realize this , but extensions like Adblock are n't actually limited to ads...There 's also other extensions like RequestPolicy ( look it up on AMO ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may not realize this, but extensions like Adblock aren't actually limited to ads...There's also other extensions like RequestPolicy (look it up on AMO).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509202</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261332180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I fail to see all good news for Firefox on that page. Or, should I say that I don't see all good news for consumers.<br>
<br>
Together, IE6, IE7 and IE8 still dominate the market. I'm afraid that will remain true for a couple more years, no matter how much pressure the rest of the world puts on the market. Separating the versions of the various browsers just clutters the picture.</i> <br>
<br>
While I don't agree with the rosy picture being painted, I think it's fair to say that web developers should (can?) no longer code solely for Internet Explorer.  Seeing IE's market share anywhere south of 90\% makes it very easy to sell to managers that poor web design will tick off a significant share of their user base.<br>
<br>
Back when it was only 5\%, very few managers cared.  Even at 10\%, most would sniff and say "1 in 10" isn't worth the effort to make the site cross-browser.  Now we're getting into the 20\% range where business types get really uncomfortable with ticking off users.<br>
<br>
It's like asking them, "Imagine if you told every 5th customer to walk through that door to shove off?"<br>
<br>
Is it good new for Firefox?  I think it's more good news for all alternate browsers as a whole.  We're almost back to where we were around 2000 where there were many different browsers in use before IE sewed up the market for half a decade.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I fail to see all good news for Firefox on that page .
Or , should I say that I do n't see all good news for consumers .
Together , IE6 , IE7 and IE8 still dominate the market .
I 'm afraid that will remain true for a couple more years , no matter how much pressure the rest of the world puts on the market .
Separating the versions of the various browsers just clutters the picture .
While I do n't agree with the rosy picture being painted , I think it 's fair to say that web developers should ( can ?
) no longer code solely for Internet Explorer .
Seeing IE 's market share anywhere south of 90 \ % makes it very easy to sell to managers that poor web design will tick off a significant share of their user base .
Back when it was only 5 \ % , very few managers cared .
Even at 10 \ % , most would sniff and say " 1 in 10 " is n't worth the effort to make the site cross-browser .
Now we 're getting into the 20 \ % range where business types get really uncomfortable with ticking off users .
It 's like asking them , " Imagine if you told every 5th customer to walk through that door to shove off ?
" Is it good new for Firefox ?
I think it 's more good news for all alternate browsers as a whole .
We 're almost back to where we were around 2000 where there were many different browsers in use before IE sewed up the market for half a decade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fail to see all good news for Firefox on that page.
Or, should I say that I don't see all good news for consumers.
Together, IE6, IE7 and IE8 still dominate the market.
I'm afraid that will remain true for a couple more years, no matter how much pressure the rest of the world puts on the market.
Separating the versions of the various browsers just clutters the picture.
While I don't agree with the rosy picture being painted, I think it's fair to say that web developers should (can?
) no longer code solely for Internet Explorer.
Seeing IE's market share anywhere south of 90\% makes it very easy to sell to managers that poor web design will tick off a significant share of their user base.
Back when it was only 5\%, very few managers cared.
Even at 10\%, most would sniff and say "1 in 10" isn't worth the effort to make the site cross-browser.
Now we're getting into the 20\% range where business types get really uncomfortable with ticking off users.
It's like asking them, "Imagine if you told every 5th customer to walk through that door to shove off?
"

Is it good new for Firefox?
I think it's more good news for all alternate browsers as a whole.
We're almost back to where we were around 2000 where there were many different browsers in use before IE sewed up the market for half a decade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510388</id>
	<title>Korea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261394040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I noticed that of the many PC cafes I've been to (probably at least 50 by now) in Korea, a majority of them are using IE6.  Most personal computers I've used, along with office computers I've used within the past year were running IE7.</p><p>Firefox/any other browser has no chance in Korea since pretty much all websites require ActiveX.  I can't online bank, make online payments, or sometimes even login to a site without using IE.</p><p>Just pointing out the first part because a PC cafe would account for around 30-60 PCs running IE6.  Now multiply that by having one on every other block.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I noticed that of the many PC cafes I 've been to ( probably at least 50 by now ) in Korea , a majority of them are using IE6 .
Most personal computers I 've used , along with office computers I 've used within the past year were running IE7.Firefox/any other browser has no chance in Korea since pretty much all websites require ActiveX .
I ca n't online bank , make online payments , or sometimes even login to a site without using IE.Just pointing out the first part because a PC cafe would account for around 30-60 PCs running IE6 .
Now multiply that by having one on every other block .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I noticed that of the many PC cafes I've been to (probably at least 50 by now) in Korea, a majority of them are using IE6.
Most personal computers I've used, along with office computers I've used within the past year were running IE7.Firefox/any other browser has no chance in Korea since pretty much all websites require ActiveX.
I can't online bank, make online payments, or sometimes even login to a site without using IE.Just pointing out the first part because a PC cafe would account for around 30-60 PCs running IE6.
Now multiply that by having one on every other block.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508332</id>
	<title>Re:One word: adblock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261322100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>(sorry Slashdot!)</i> <p>
When I first saw the option on Slashdot's main page to turn off ads I was a tad croggled.  I'd been using Firefox with AdBlock + for so long I'd forgotten that there were ads on Slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( sorry Slashdot !
) When I first saw the option on Slashdot 's main page to turn off ads I was a tad croggled .
I 'd been using Firefox with AdBlock + for so long I 'd forgotten that there were ads on Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(sorry Slashdot!
) 
When I first saw the option on Slashdot's main page to turn off ads I was a tad croggled.
I'd been using Firefox with AdBlock + for so long I'd forgotten that there were ads on Slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154</id>
	<title>Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261320120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is bond to happen. Even our manager can manage to feel the speed difference between IE7 and FF3, let alone FF3.5's tracemonkey and stuff. Even if people are not interested in Open Standard, vast amount of plug-ins and things, this alone would make people switch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is bond to happen .
Even our manager can manage to feel the speed difference between IE7 and FF3 , let alone FF3.5 's tracemonkey and stuff .
Even if people are not interested in Open Standard , vast amount of plug-ins and things , this alone would make people switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is bond to happen.
Even our manager can manage to feel the speed difference between IE7 and FF3, let alone FF3.5's tracemonkey and stuff.
Even if people are not interested in Open Standard, vast amount of plug-ins and things, this alone would make people switch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510176</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261391460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes indeed, I think FF is now "king for a day".<br>Your graph is more realistic, thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes indeed , I think FF is now " king for a day " .Your graph is more realistic , thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes indeed, I think FF is now "king for a day".Your graph is more realistic, thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510450</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261394940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yeah right... ActiveX<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yeah right... ActiveX : /</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yeah right... ActiveX :/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511414</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>houghi</author>
	<datestamp>1261407120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you say that with Vista, IE8 will be the one that will be used. Don't forget that in Europe there will be a choice and we will have to see if this will have an influence or not. Could be that many companies are going for Firefox or even something else as installation will be just as easy and security can be different.<br>Obviously some will still be forced to work with IE as their aplications otherwise won't work.</p><p>Where I work we use both IE and Firefox as some things we need to do won't work in IE and others won't work in FF. Unfortunatly none of them are things we can deal with directly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you say that with Vista , IE8 will be the one that will be used .
Do n't forget that in Europe there will be a choice and we will have to see if this will have an influence or not .
Could be that many companies are going for Firefox or even something else as installation will be just as easy and security can be different.Obviously some will still be forced to work with IE as their aplications otherwise wo n't work.Where I work we use both IE and Firefox as some things we need to do wo n't work in IE and others wo n't work in FF .
Unfortunatly none of them are things we can deal with directly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you say that with Vista, IE8 will be the one that will be used.
Don't forget that in Europe there will be a choice and we will have to see if this will have an influence or not.
Could be that many companies are going for Firefox or even something else as installation will be just as easy and security can be different.Obviously some will still be forced to work with IE as their aplications otherwise won't work.Where I work we use both IE and Firefox as some things we need to do won't work in IE and others won't work in FF.
Unfortunatly none of them are things we can deal with directly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30520394</id>
	<title>Compare the numbers</title>
	<author>Jim Hall</author>
	<datestamp>1261416300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Compare the numbers from North America against Europe. See the difference in Europe? <em>That</em> is what you get when you don't have total monopoly. This is why user choice is good.</p><p>Of course, if you compare the numbers with Asia, you'll also see the effects of piracy. Another reason software piracy is bad for the rest of us, if they're propping up IE.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Compare the numbers from North America against Europe .
See the difference in Europe ?
That is what you get when you do n't have total monopoly .
This is why user choice is good.Of course , if you compare the numbers with Asia , you 'll also see the effects of piracy .
Another reason software piracy is bad for the rest of us , if they 're propping up IE .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compare the numbers from North America against Europe.
See the difference in Europe?
That is what you get when you don't have total monopoly.
This is why user choice is good.Of course, if you compare the numbers with Asia, you'll also see the effects of piracy.
Another reason software piracy is bad for the rest of us, if they're propping up IE.
:-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508480</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>jonwil</author>
	<datestamp>1261323840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IE8 is much better than IE6 and the sooner we can kill off IE6 in favor of IE7 and IE8, the better.<br>Now, I am not saying that IE8 is better than alternatives like Firefox (I use SeaMonkey myself) but its better than IE6 (in fact, the only browsers I know of that were worse than IE6 were IE5.x and Netscape 4.x)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IE8 is much better than IE6 and the sooner we can kill off IE6 in favor of IE7 and IE8 , the better.Now , I am not saying that IE8 is better than alternatives like Firefox ( I use SeaMonkey myself ) but its better than IE6 ( in fact , the only browsers I know of that were worse than IE6 were IE5.x and Netscape 4.x )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE8 is much better than IE6 and the sooner we can kill off IE6 in favor of IE7 and IE8, the better.Now, I am not saying that IE8 is better than alternatives like Firefox (I use SeaMonkey myself) but its better than IE6 (in fact, the only browsers I know of that were worse than IE6 were IE5.x and Netscape 4.x)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164</id>
	<title>Why MS failed.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261320360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>IE has been diluted by three different versions. IE6 is only really held on to by organisations that developed everything for IE6, and subsequently had everything break when testing IE7. This despite IE6 barely working on half the internet now. Ironically Mircosoft's attempt at lock-in in the past has backfired, few outfits have updated to IE7, less to IE8.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IE has been diluted by three different versions .
IE6 is only really held on to by organisations that developed everything for IE6 , and subsequently had everything break when testing IE7 .
This despite IE6 barely working on half the internet now .
Ironically Mircosoft 's attempt at lock-in in the past has backfired , few outfits have updated to IE7 , less to IE8 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE has been diluted by three different versions.
IE6 is only really held on to by organisations that developed everything for IE6, and subsequently had everything break when testing IE7.
This despite IE6 barely working on half the internet now.
Ironically Mircosoft's attempt at lock-in in the past has backfired, few outfits have updated to IE7, less to IE8.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508490</id>
	<title>Re:so....?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261323960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If by "winner" you mean "has largest \% of users", then no, according to the first link Firefox 3.5 has the largest \% of users. They do break each version out of each product (IE 6, 7, 8 and FF 2, 3, and 3.5) so it is an apples to apples comparison (none of this "all FF" vs. a version of IE).</p><p>Of course where they're getting these numbers from will make a huge difference. There are lies, damn lies, and web statistics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If by " winner " you mean " has largest \ % of users " , then no , according to the first link Firefox 3.5 has the largest \ % of users .
They do break each version out of each product ( IE 6 , 7 , 8 and FF 2 , 3 , and 3.5 ) so it is an apples to apples comparison ( none of this " all FF " vs. a version of IE ) .Of course where they 're getting these numbers from will make a huge difference .
There are lies , damn lies , and web statistics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If by "winner" you mean "has largest \% of users", then no, according to the first link Firefox 3.5 has the largest \% of users.
They do break each version out of each product (IE 6, 7, 8 and FF 2, 3, and 3.5) so it is an apples to apples comparison (none of this "all FF" vs. a version of IE).Of course where they're getting these numbers from will make a huge difference.
There are lies, damn lies, and web statistics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509290</id>
	<title>Re:Only reason for any IE6 market share</title>
	<author>tokul</author>
	<datestamp>1261333440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Seems to me IE6 having any market share at all is because of the huge number of XP non registered copies floating around in places like China and even the US.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Some people might run unsigned business applications from unc shares. If OS is updated by IE7-8 browser, it starts complaining about unsigned apps every time app is started. We don't need that stinking warning box and these IE OS updates and WGA addons are kept away from user machines.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems to me IE6 having any market share at all is because of the huge number of XP non registered copies floating around in places like China and even the US .
Some people might run unsigned business applications from unc shares .
If OS is updated by IE7-8 browser , it starts complaining about unsigned apps every time app is started .
We do n't need that stinking warning box and these IE OS updates and WGA addons are kept away from user machines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems to me IE6 having any market share at all is because of the huge number of XP non registered copies floating around in places like China and even the US.
Some people might run unsigned business applications from unc shares.
If OS is updated by IE7-8 browser, it starts complaining about unsigned apps every time app is started.
We don't need that stinking warning box and these IE OS updates and WGA addons are kept away from user machines.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517414</id>
	<title>Re:IE8 displacing older versions!</title>
	<author>lamapper</author>
	<datestamp>1261393080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You need to look at the trends for IE7 and IE8, it looks like the market share is trending towards upgrades from IE7 to IE8, just like how Firefox 3 lost share at around the same rate as Firefox 3.5 gained share. Going by this, you'll see that IE8 is going to head straight back up to around the 40\% mark. Which, all things considered is GREAT news - IE8 is a much better browser as far as standards-compliancy is concerned and it means the web is on it's way to being a much more stable platform, rah rah rah. Also interesting, check the decline in IE6 also - I wonder if IE6 users are flocking to IE8 also - maybe IE8 will end up with ~60\% market share? No matter what happens, less IE7 and IE6 = WIN.</p></div><p>This is GREAT news.  And I do not even have to mention European, Asia or Africa stats.

</p><p>40\% to 60\% usage is way below what it use to be.  Didn't IE usage hit either 80\% or 90\% at one time?  Regardless IE usage is trending the right way, down.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You need to look at the trends for IE7 and IE8 , it looks like the market share is trending towards upgrades from IE7 to IE8 , just like how Firefox 3 lost share at around the same rate as Firefox 3.5 gained share .
Going by this , you 'll see that IE8 is going to head straight back up to around the 40 \ % mark .
Which , all things considered is GREAT news - IE8 is a much better browser as far as standards-compliancy is concerned and it means the web is on it 's way to being a much more stable platform , rah rah rah .
Also interesting , check the decline in IE6 also - I wonder if IE6 users are flocking to IE8 also - maybe IE8 will end up with ~ 60 \ % market share ?
No matter what happens , less IE7 and IE6 = WIN.This is GREAT news .
And I do not even have to mention European , Asia or Africa stats .
40 \ % to 60 \ % usage is way below what it use to be .
Did n't IE usage hit either 80 \ % or 90 \ % at one time ?
Regardless IE usage is trending the right way , down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need to look at the trends for IE7 and IE8, it looks like the market share is trending towards upgrades from IE7 to IE8, just like how Firefox 3 lost share at around the same rate as Firefox 3.5 gained share.
Going by this, you'll see that IE8 is going to head straight back up to around the 40\% mark.
Which, all things considered is GREAT news - IE8 is a much better browser as far as standards-compliancy is concerned and it means the web is on it's way to being a much more stable platform, rah rah rah.
Also interesting, check the decline in IE6 also - I wonder if IE6 users are flocking to IE8 also - maybe IE8 will end up with ~60\% market share?
No matter what happens, less IE7 and IE6 = WIN.This is GREAT news.
And I do not even have to mention European, Asia or Africa stats.
40\% to 60\% usage is way below what it use to be.
Didn't IE usage hit either 80\% or 90\% at one time?
Regardless IE usage is trending the right way, down.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510404</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>aftk2</author>
	<datestamp>1261394280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
But, to be fair to the article, IE 6 and IE 8 are two wildly different beasts. IE 8 is MUCH closer to Firefox 3.5 (and Safari 3, Chrome, etc...) than IE 6. From a web developer's perspective, I'd much rather this article break the browser's down on their capabilities than their names/families.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But , to be fair to the article , IE 6 and IE 8 are two wildly different beasts .
IE 8 is MUCH closer to Firefox 3.5 ( and Safari 3 , Chrome , etc... ) than IE 6 .
From a web developer 's perspective , I 'd much rather this article break the browser 's down on their capabilities than their names/families .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
But, to be fair to the article, IE 6 and IE 8 are two wildly different beasts.
IE 8 is MUCH closer to Firefox 3.5 (and Safari 3, Chrome, etc...) than IE 6.
From a web developer's perspective, I'd much rather this article break the browser's down on their capabilities than their names/families.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509576</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Waccoon</author>
	<datestamp>1261337580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it depends on your user base.  My web site is geared towards artists and utilizes Java applets to let people draw pictures.  My stats are:</p><ul> <li>66\% Firefox (PC/Linux/Mac)</li><li>24\% IE (all versions)</li><li>6\% Opera</li><li>3\% Safari</li><li>1\% Other</li></ul><p>Biggest surprise is that Opera outnumbers Safari, and always has.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it depends on your user base .
My web site is geared towards artists and utilizes Java applets to let people draw pictures .
My stats are : 66 \ % Firefox ( PC/Linux/Mac ) 24 \ % IE ( all versions ) 6 \ % Opera3 \ % Safari1 \ % OtherBiggest surprise is that Opera outnumbers Safari , and always has .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it depends on your user base.
My web site is geared towards artists and utilizes Java applets to let people draw pictures.
My stats are: 66\% Firefox (PC/Linux/Mac)24\% IE (all versions)6\% Opera3\% Safari1\% OtherBiggest surprise is that Opera outnumbers Safari, and always has.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513558</id>
	<title>Re:Only reason for any IE6 market share</title>
	<author>ClarifyAmbiguity</author>
	<datestamp>1261418160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd say that a lot of installations are for corporate environments which use legacy applications (both Intranet and web-based) which rely on IE6, or which are not updated due to the fear of incompatibility.

I use only Opera and Firefox at home (and on work computers when permitted by system policy), but I've had IE6 on various work laptops (both for my firm and for clients) due to these kinds of issues.  Web-based clients with issues included a time and expense system (critical in a professional services firm), an older iteration of Salesforce.com, and all kinds of home-grown applications.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say that a lot of installations are for corporate environments which use legacy applications ( both Intranet and web-based ) which rely on IE6 , or which are not updated due to the fear of incompatibility .
I use only Opera and Firefox at home ( and on work computers when permitted by system policy ) , but I 've had IE6 on various work laptops ( both for my firm and for clients ) due to these kinds of issues .
Web-based clients with issues included a time and expense system ( critical in a professional services firm ) , an older iteration of Salesforce.com , and all kinds of home-grown applications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say that a lot of installations are for corporate environments which use legacy applications (both Intranet and web-based) which rely on IE6, or which are not updated due to the fear of incompatibility.
I use only Opera and Firefox at home (and on work computers when permitted by system policy), but I've had IE6 on various work laptops (both for my firm and for clients) due to these kinds of issues.
Web-based clients with issues included a time and expense system (critical in a professional services firm), an older iteration of Salesforce.com, and all kinds of home-grown applications.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>rrohbeck</author>
	<datestamp>1261321800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see "This site requires Internet Explorer 6" on our Intranet all the time. Peoplesoft for example, urgh.<br>Of course, the site will run perfectly with Firefox if I change the user agent string.</p><p>Corporate Intranets with lazy admins or dumb policies are what keeps IE6 alive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see " This site requires Internet Explorer 6 " on our Intranet all the time .
Peoplesoft for example , urgh.Of course , the site will run perfectly with Firefox if I change the user agent string.Corporate Intranets with lazy admins or dumb policies are what keeps IE6 alive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see "This site requires Internet Explorer 6" on our Intranet all the time.
Peoplesoft for example, urgh.Of course, the site will run perfectly with Firefox if I change the user agent string.Corporate Intranets with lazy admins or dumb policies are what keeps IE6 alive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508628</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261325520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The fact that the IE market is split between 6.X, 7.X and 8.X doesn't not detract from the (regrettable) fact that Internet Explorer is the most popular browser, worldwide. Different versions do not a different browser make.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sure, if you are just a spectator cheering for your team from the sidelines.</p><p>But not if you are a web developer/designer, the different versions are very different browsers. In terms of making a modern website work there is much more difference between IE8 and IE6 than there is between IE8 and FF/Safari/Chrome/Opera etc.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact that the IE market is split between 6.X , 7.X and 8.X does n't not detract from the ( regrettable ) fact that Internet Explorer is the most popular browser , worldwide .
Different versions do not a different browser make.Sure , if you are just a spectator cheering for your team from the sidelines.But not if you are a web developer/designer , the different versions are very different browsers .
In terms of making a modern website work there is much more difference between IE8 and IE6 than there is between IE8 and FF/Safari/Chrome/Opera etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact that the IE market is split between 6.X, 7.X and 8.X doesn't not detract from the (regrettable) fact that Internet Explorer is the most popular browser, worldwide.
Different versions do not a different browser make.Sure, if you are just a spectator cheering for your team from the sidelines.But not if you are a web developer/designer, the different versions are very different browsers.
In terms of making a modern website work there is much more difference between IE8 and IE6 than there is between IE8 and FF/Safari/Chrome/Opera etc.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510428</id>
	<title>Re:Pretty deceiving</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261394640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows Update is enabled by default, and by default will attempt to update I.E. for you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows Update is enabled by default , and by default will attempt to update I.E .
for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows Update is enabled by default, and by default will attempt to update I.E.
for you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509910</id>
	<title>Re:Why MS failed.</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1261386720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually IE8 might be soon the king of IEs even corporations now have a serious upgrade look.<br>I expect that IE7 wont really have the impact IE6 had and frankly spoken IE8 while not being really that good is good enough for now.<br>Still I applaud the rise of firefox, this will open enough pressure on M$ to finally support SVG and raise their ACID compliancy from 20\% up to decent levels without lying that ACID tested unfinished standards (which it does not)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually IE8 might be soon the king of IEs even corporations now have a serious upgrade look.I expect that IE7 wont really have the impact IE6 had and frankly spoken IE8 while not being really that good is good enough for now.Still I applaud the rise of firefox , this will open enough pressure on M $ to finally support SVG and raise their ACID compliancy from 20 \ % up to decent levels without lying that ACID tested unfinished standards ( which it does not )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually IE8 might be soon the king of IEs even corporations now have a serious upgrade look.I expect that IE7 wont really have the impact IE6 had and frankly spoken IE8 while not being really that good is good enough for now.Still I applaud the rise of firefox, this will open enough pressure on M$ to finally support SVG and raise their ACID compliancy from 20\% up to decent levels without lying that ACID tested unfinished standards (which it does not)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508274</id>
	<title>A new topic logo, perhaps?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261321440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now that Firefox is the dominant browser, perhaps the topic graphic should default to Firefox instead of IE? It is more recognizable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that Firefox is the dominant browser , perhaps the topic graphic should default to Firefox instead of IE ?
It is more recognizable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that Firefox is the dominant browser, perhaps the topic graphic should default to Firefox instead of IE?
It is more recognizable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511208</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261405320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As has been said before, the versions of browsers people use does make a huge difference&mdash;mainly for front-end designers trying to take advantage of advanced AJAX, JavaScript and CSS functionality that IE6 is not capable of supporting. Our only hope is to get more people to upgrade to browsers, like Firefox, that do support, (and actually want to support) said code. It isn't really an IE vs. Firefox match, it is a "does this browser support what I need it too" question, and IE6 definitely does not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As has been said before , the versions of browsers people use does make a huge difference    mainly for front-end designers trying to take advantage of advanced AJAX , JavaScript and CSS functionality that IE6 is not capable of supporting .
Our only hope is to get more people to upgrade to browsers , like Firefox , that do support , ( and actually want to support ) said code .
It is n't really an IE vs. Firefox match , it is a " does this browser support what I need it too " question , and IE6 definitely does not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As has been said before, the versions of browsers people use does make a huge difference—mainly for front-end designers trying to take advantage of advanced AJAX, JavaScript and CSS functionality that IE6 is not capable of supporting.
Our only hope is to get more people to upgrade to browsers, like Firefox, that do support, (and actually want to support) said code.
It isn't really an IE vs. Firefox match, it is a "does this browser support what I need it too" question, and IE6 definitely does not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509400</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1261335000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe you should upgrade people soft to something from this decade then?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe you should upgrade people soft to something from this decade then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe you should upgrade people soft to something from this decade then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30516818</id>
	<title>Browser World Map</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261390080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://digg.com/software/World\_map\_of\_most\_popular\_browsers\_by\_country\_Infographic</p><p>Recently I had created this world map showing the most popular browsers by country using the same date.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //digg.com/software/World \ _map \ _of \ _most \ _popular \ _browsers \ _by \ _country \ _InfographicRecently I had created this world map showing the most popular browsers by country using the same date .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://digg.com/software/World\_map\_of\_most\_popular\_browsers\_by\_country\_InfographicRecently I had created this world map showing the most popular browsers by country using the same date.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511196</id>
	<title>Re:Who is using IE6:</title>
	<author>HotBBQ</author>
	<datestamp>1261405140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That sounds suspiciously like the place I work.  You ought to give www.portableapps.com a look.  I've been (mostly) IE6 free at work for a couple of years now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That sounds suspiciously like the place I work .
You ought to give www.portableapps.com a look .
I 've been ( mostly ) IE6 free at work for a couple of years now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That sounds suspiciously like the place I work.
You ought to give www.portableapps.com a look.
I've been (mostly) IE6 free at work for a couple of years now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</id>
	<title>An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261320840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have another way -- Firefox (all versions) at 32\%, Internet Explorer (all versions) at 55\%. The fact that the IE market is split between 6.X, 7.X and 8.X doesn't not detract from the (regrettable) fact that Internet Explorer is the most popular browser, worldwide. Different versions do not a different browser make.</p><p>In hindsight, this distribution is rather predictable -- FF nags you to update (rightly so) whereas IE can't even update itself, let along notify you about it.</p><p>Here's a plot (thankfully, they give out the raw CSV data) with the "all versions" included. Firefox has a ways to go. <a href="http://yfrog.com/j5temptlp" title="yfrog.com">http://yfrog.com/j5temptlp</a> [yfrog.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have another way -- Firefox ( all versions ) at 32 \ % , Internet Explorer ( all versions ) at 55 \ % .
The fact that the IE market is split between 6.X , 7.X and 8.X does n't not detract from the ( regrettable ) fact that Internet Explorer is the most popular browser , worldwide .
Different versions do not a different browser make.In hindsight , this distribution is rather predictable -- FF nags you to update ( rightly so ) whereas IE ca n't even update itself , let along notify you about it.Here 's a plot ( thankfully , they give out the raw CSV data ) with the " all versions " included .
Firefox has a ways to go .
http : //yfrog.com/j5temptlp [ yfrog.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have another way -- Firefox (all versions) at 32\%, Internet Explorer (all versions) at 55\%.
The fact that the IE market is split between 6.X, 7.X and 8.X doesn't not detract from the (regrettable) fact that Internet Explorer is the most popular browser, worldwide.
Different versions do not a different browser make.In hindsight, this distribution is rather predictable -- FF nags you to update (rightly so) whereas IE can't even update itself, let along notify you about it.Here's a plot (thankfully, they give out the raw CSV data) with the "all versions" included.
Firefox has a ways to go.
http://yfrog.com/j5temptlp [yfrog.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508542</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261324380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wouldn't say most FF users are more tech savvy.  I would say that most FF users know at least one tech savvy person.  Also, I don't think I've blocked StatCounter.  I don't know why I should.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't say most FF users are more tech savvy .
I would say that most FF users know at least one tech savvy person .
Also , I do n't think I 've blocked StatCounter .
I do n't know why I should .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't say most FF users are more tech savvy.
I would say that most FF users know at least one tech savvy person.
Also, I don't think I've blocked StatCounter.
I don't know why I should.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512924</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261415460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've tried that (I did it with Chrome however).</p><p>They did notice.  They said, "Why is the Internet so much faster now?".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've tried that ( I did it with Chrome however ) .They did notice .
They said , " Why is the Internet so much faster now ?
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've tried that (I did it with Chrome however).They did notice.
They said, "Why is the Internet so much faster now?
".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508702</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261326540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"The headline may well become true" might be a reason to publish the headline in the future, but it isn't a reason to publish it now.  If you want to publish something now, fine, this is an interesting story -- but it needs a different headline.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The headline may well become true " might be a reason to publish the headline in the future , but it is n't a reason to publish it now .
If you want to publish something now , fine , this is an interesting story -- but it needs a different headline .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The headline may well become true" might be a reason to publish the headline in the future, but it isn't a reason to publish it now.
If you want to publish something now, fine, this is an interesting story -- but it needs a different headline.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510042</id>
	<title>Re:One word: adblock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261388760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually Adblock, Noscript and Flasblock are a great way show the benefits of Firefox</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually Adblock , Noscript and Flasblock are a great way show the benefits of Firefox</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually Adblock, Noscript and Flasblock are a great way show the benefits of Firefox</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508796</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261328040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are running a very old peoplesoft then - PS supports mozilla natively  now = and has for sometime !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are running a very old peoplesoft then - PS supports mozilla natively now = and has for sometime !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are running a very old peoplesoft then - PS supports mozilla natively  now = and has for sometime !</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508808</id>
	<title>Over three quarters of web spam attacks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261328220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...on my servers come from hijacked IE6 machines or bots claiming to be IE6.</p><p>Nail cannot come too soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...on my servers come from hijacked IE6 machines or bots claiming to be IE6.Nail can not come too soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...on my servers come from hijacked IE6 machines or bots claiming to be IE6.Nail cannot come too soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30518836</id>
	<title>Tiger Eats Kitty Balls</title>
	<author>Mana Mana</author>
	<datestamp>1261403340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you're saying this is a web bug, and we have a FF plugin for those: Ghostery.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're saying this is a web bug , and we have a FF plugin for those : Ghostery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're saying this is a web bug, and we have a FF plugin for those: Ghostery.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508238</id>
	<title>so....?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261321140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you put all the firefox's (1-3.5) vs. the IE's (5-8) what do you get?
The winner for now is still IE. Now, Firefox is getting more blot, and IE getting better. What will Firefox do to fight back? Add even more blot? I have moved to using IE, Firefox, and chrome for now. If firefox keeps down this path, I will stop using it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you put all the firefox 's ( 1-3.5 ) vs. the IE 's ( 5-8 ) what do you get ?
The winner for now is still IE .
Now , Firefox is getting more blot , and IE getting better .
What will Firefox do to fight back ?
Add even more blot ?
I have moved to using IE , Firefox , and chrome for now .
If firefox keeps down this path , I will stop using it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you put all the firefox's (1-3.5) vs. the IE's (5-8) what do you get?
The winner for now is still IE.
Now, Firefox is getting more blot, and IE getting better.
What will Firefox do to fight back?
Add even more blot?
I have moved to using IE, Firefox, and chrome for now.
If firefox keeps down this path, I will stop using it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509160</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>icepick72</author>
	<datestamp>1261331640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can you imagine if<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./ displayed all the titles now that might be correct in the future... we'd need a special topic dedicated to trends, forecasts and future-telling.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you imagine if ./ displayed all the titles now that might be correct in the future... we 'd need a special topic dedicated to trends , forecasts and future-telling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you imagine if ./ displayed all the titles now that might be correct in the future... we'd need a special topic dedicated to trends, forecasts and future-telling.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510834</id>
	<title>Re:Who is using IE6:</title>
	<author>thue</author>
	<datestamp>1261400280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps you could try requesting an exception by saying that you need Firefox to read Slashdot?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps you could try requesting an exception by saying that you need Firefox to read Slashdot ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps you could try requesting an exception by saying that you need Firefox to read Slashdot?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511520</id>
	<title>Re:Browser down.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261407660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has anyone taken a look at the bar chart? Shows a bit different perspective.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone taken a look at the bar chart ?
Shows a bit different perspective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone taken a look at the bar chart?
Shows a bit different perspective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508280</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261321500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lalalalala, I can't here you. Firefox has taken major marketshare. Lalalalala</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lalalalala , I ca n't here you .
Firefox has taken major marketshare .
Lalalalala</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lalalalala, I can't here you.
Firefox has taken major marketshare.
Lalalalala</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508136</id>
	<title>first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261319880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>n/t</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>n/t</tokentext>
<sentencetext>n/t</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517458</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>Zerimar</author>
	<datestamp>1261393320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IE8 isn't garbage - it's Javascript performance is pretty awful, but it does bring a few decent features to the table.  Accelerators are simple, but effective; web slices might be glorified RSS feeds, but they work and Yahoo mail supports them; and the best part is that each tab gets its own thread.  IE8 and Chrome are the only browsers that do this (to my knowledge) and it's really handy - broken websites don't hork up your entire browsing session like they do in Firefox and Opera.

FWIW, I use Opera as my primary, and IE8 as my backup in Vista/7 and FF3.5 as my backup in XP.  For whatever reason, IE8 feels faster than FF in Vista/7, whereas FF3.5 feels faster in XP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IE8 is n't garbage - it 's Javascript performance is pretty awful , but it does bring a few decent features to the table .
Accelerators are simple , but effective ; web slices might be glorified RSS feeds , but they work and Yahoo mail supports them ; and the best part is that each tab gets its own thread .
IE8 and Chrome are the only browsers that do this ( to my knowledge ) and it 's really handy - broken websites do n't hork up your entire browsing session like they do in Firefox and Opera .
FWIW , I use Opera as my primary , and IE8 as my backup in Vista/7 and FF3.5 as my backup in XP .
For whatever reason , IE8 feels faster than FF in Vista/7 , whereas FF3.5 feels faster in XP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE8 isn't garbage - it's Javascript performance is pretty awful, but it does bring a few decent features to the table.
Accelerators are simple, but effective; web slices might be glorified RSS feeds, but they work and Yahoo mail supports them; and the best part is that each tab gets its own thread.
IE8 and Chrome are the only browsers that do this (to my knowledge) and it's really handy - broken websites don't hork up your entire browsing session like they do in Firefox and Opera.
FWIW, I use Opera as my primary, and IE8 as my backup in Vista/7 and FF3.5 as my backup in XP.
For whatever reason, IE8 feels faster than FF in Vista/7, whereas FF3.5 feels faster in XP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512366</id>
	<title>Yeah...</title>
	<author>Schnoogs</author>
	<datestamp>1261412820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>but IE as a whole is still more popular.  IT would seem that IE users are simply more splintered on what version they use where as FireFox users (god have mercy on them) are more concentrated within one version.</htmltext>
<tokenext>but IE as a whole is still more popular .
IT would seem that IE users are simply more splintered on what version they use where as FireFox users ( god have mercy on them ) are more concentrated within one version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but IE as a whole is still more popular.
IT would seem that IE users are simply more splintered on what version they use where as FireFox users (god have mercy on them) are more concentrated within one version.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508338</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>shird</author>
	<datestamp>1261322160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And once Firefox 3.6 is out, that line for Firefox 3.5 will drop by half and IE 7 will become more popular than Firefox 3.5 overnight (according to the submitter's logic).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And once Firefox 3.6 is out , that line for Firefox 3.5 will drop by half and IE 7 will become more popular than Firefox 3.5 overnight ( according to the submitter 's logic ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And once Firefox 3.6 is out, that line for Firefox 3.5 will drop by half and IE 7 will become more popular than Firefox 3.5 overnight (according to the submitter's logic).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510936</id>
	<title>IE Franchise still most popular</title>
	<author>EmagGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1261401840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FireFox is only most popular if you break each browser down to it's version number.</p><p>If you conduct an intellectually honest comparison, it's clear that the IE Franchise is still dominant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FireFox is only most popular if you break each browser down to it 's version number.If you conduct an intellectually honest comparison , it 's clear that the IE Franchise is still dominant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FireFox is only most popular if you break each browser down to it's version number.If you conduct an intellectually honest comparison, it's clear that the IE Franchise is still dominant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513026</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>SolitaryMan</author>
	<datestamp>1261415760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
But this is more important! When you develop a web site and then you test it, you are no longer testing it in "Internet Explorer", which used to be the case. You are testing it in every specific version of it. So, from this data you can conclude, that the most important thing is get it to work in FF3.5, *then* IE7, then IE6 and so on. The same applies to the severity of bugs in your app.
</p><p>
But when it comes to marketing dept, yes, you are right, FF is still behind.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But this is more important !
When you develop a web site and then you test it , you are no longer testing it in " Internet Explorer " , which used to be the case .
You are testing it in every specific version of it .
So , from this data you can conclude , that the most important thing is get it to work in FF3.5 , * then * IE7 , then IE6 and so on .
The same applies to the severity of bugs in your app .
But when it comes to marketing dept , yes , you are right , FF is still behind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
But this is more important!
When you develop a web site and then you test it, you are no longer testing it in "Internet Explorer", which used to be the case.
You are testing it in every specific version of it.
So, from this data you can conclude, that the most important thing is get it to work in FF3.5, *then* IE7, then IE6 and so on.
The same applies to the severity of bugs in your app.
But when it comes to marketing dept, yes, you are right, FF is still behind.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512760</id>
	<title>Beg to differ...</title>
	<author>PinkyDead</author>
	<datestamp>1261414800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First, why does market share make any difference at all?  I'm not going to use IE ever and no amount of statistics is going to change that.</p><p>However, when companies and governments provide products and services they will always target the most popular browsers and they will most definitely include the version number, and that will go on the side of the box.</p><p>These figures now mean that I, with my firefox 3.5, will be given the best and earliest consideration when services are provided, followed by those using IE8 - so for instance when I go to buy some thing off a website, my experience will work, while those using IE6 (bless!) will have to suffer (Mwahahahahahaha!!!)</p><p>The total figures are just for fanboys who want to claim Microsoft is better than Linux or vice versa or whatever.  Good luck to them, I'd rather have stuff that works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , why does market share make any difference at all ?
I 'm not going to use IE ever and no amount of statistics is going to change that.However , when companies and governments provide products and services they will always target the most popular browsers and they will most definitely include the version number , and that will go on the side of the box.These figures now mean that I , with my firefox 3.5 , will be given the best and earliest consideration when services are provided , followed by those using IE8 - so for instance when I go to buy some thing off a website , my experience will work , while those using IE6 ( bless !
) will have to suffer ( Mwahahahahahaha ! ! !
) The total figures are just for fanboys who want to claim Microsoft is better than Linux or vice versa or whatever .
Good luck to them , I 'd rather have stuff that works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, why does market share make any difference at all?
I'm not going to use IE ever and no amount of statistics is going to change that.However, when companies and governments provide products and services they will always target the most popular browsers and they will most definitely include the version number, and that will go on the side of the box.These figures now mean that I, with my firefox 3.5, will be given the best and earliest consideration when services are provided, followed by those using IE8 - so for instance when I go to buy some thing off a website, my experience will work, while those using IE6 (bless!
) will have to suffer (Mwahahahahahaha!!!
)The total figures are just for fanboys who want to claim Microsoft is better than Linux or vice versa or whatever.
Good luck to them, I'd rather have stuff that works.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512718</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1261414500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>so unless you've blocked all third party images</i><br>If you block only images (and frames) originating from different second-level domain than webpages displaying them, the web looks pretty much the same, with less ads though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so unless you 've blocked all third party imagesIf you block only images ( and frames ) originating from different second-level domain than webpages displaying them , the web looks pretty much the same , with less ads though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so unless you've blocked all third party imagesIf you block only images (and frames) originating from different second-level domain than webpages displaying them, the web looks pretty much the same, with less ads though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508428</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>quickOnTheUptake</author>
	<datestamp>1261323240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Total marketshare isn't the most interesting metric, the rate of change is. Right now FF 3.5 is gaining users faster than IE8. The question (which the graph doesn't readily answer) is whether the net FF adoption rate is faster than the net IE adoption rate. I.e, is the total number of FF users going up faster than the total number of IE users? Is FF3.5 going up fast just because FF3 users are upgrading more quickly than IE7 users?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Total marketshare is n't the most interesting metric , the rate of change is .
Right now FF 3.5 is gaining users faster than IE8 .
The question ( which the graph does n't readily answer ) is whether the net FF adoption rate is faster than the net IE adoption rate .
I.e , is the total number of FF users going up faster than the total number of IE users ?
Is FF3.5 going up fast just because FF3 users are upgrading more quickly than IE7 users ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Total marketshare isn't the most interesting metric, the rate of change is.
Right now FF 3.5 is gaining users faster than IE8.
The question (which the graph doesn't readily answer) is whether the net FF adoption rate is faster than the net IE adoption rate.
I.e, is the total number of FF users going up faster than the total number of IE users?
Is FF3.5 going up fast just because FF3 users are upgrading more quickly than IE7 users?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508414</id>
	<title>IE6 isn't being held up by choice</title>
	<author>SoonerSkeene</author>
	<datestamp>1261323120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know a single home user on any OS that is using IE6.  My incredibly behind-the-times relatives on Windows 2000 are using Firefox, and any of my XP or newer friends and colleagues are using Firefox or a newer flavor of IE (or even Chrome).

No, the thing holding up IE6 is corporate America.  My company has 70 large locations in America, and probably twice that around the glob, together running about 60,000 computers.  Only one (very tiny) division of our company is allowed to run anything other than IE6, and that's because they are a Windows Vista technical support group.

The rest of us are forced to use IE6 because most of our applications have been replaced by browser-based 'solutions' like Siebel CRM and the like, using ActiveX and most of which aren't officially supported on newer browsers.  It's painful.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know a single home user on any OS that is using IE6 .
My incredibly behind-the-times relatives on Windows 2000 are using Firefox , and any of my XP or newer friends and colleagues are using Firefox or a newer flavor of IE ( or even Chrome ) .
No , the thing holding up IE6 is corporate America .
My company has 70 large locations in America , and probably twice that around the glob , together running about 60,000 computers .
Only one ( very tiny ) division of our company is allowed to run anything other than IE6 , and that 's because they are a Windows Vista technical support group .
The rest of us are forced to use IE6 because most of our applications have been replaced by browser-based 'solutions ' like Siebel CRM and the like , using ActiveX and most of which are n't officially supported on newer browsers .
It 's painful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know a single home user on any OS that is using IE6.
My incredibly behind-the-times relatives on Windows 2000 are using Firefox, and any of my XP or newer friends and colleagues are using Firefox or a newer flavor of IE (or even Chrome).
No, the thing holding up IE6 is corporate America.
My company has 70 large locations in America, and probably twice that around the glob, together running about 60,000 computers.
Only one (very tiny) division of our company is allowed to run anything other than IE6, and that's because they are a Windows Vista technical support group.
The rest of us are forced to use IE6 because most of our applications have been replaced by browser-based 'solutions' like Siebel CRM and the like, using ActiveX and most of which aren't officially supported on newer browsers.
It's painful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509350</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>sheriff\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1261334160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone has said elsewhere, the more important issue here is here:</p><p><a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951" title="statcounter.com">http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951</a> [statcounter.com]</p><p>The previous graph shows something we already know: that people happily flit between versions of the same browser, especially home users. This graph shows browser-family usage. And it shows a steady decline of IE against FF and Chrome.</p><p>But again, actually, that's not the important issue here. Here's what matters: <b>the browser war was won when IE's monopoly was broken</b>. Developing for just IE used to be a legitimate business practice - you were only alienating 10\% of your customers, and most of them had IE on their system anyway. I remember when all my online banking required IE, as did a bunch of other sites I wanted to use.</p><p>I couldn't care less if Chrome eats FF's market-share. If Safari trumps them both. What matters, what's important, is the forced interoperability that comes from not having one browser with 90\% coverage. And when that happens, everyone wins: as is rapidly becoming that case. Each new version of IE becomes more and more standards compliant, because they can no longer abuse their monopoly.</p><p>-P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone has said elsewhere , the more important issue here is here : http : //gs.statcounter.com/ # browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951 [ statcounter.com ] The previous graph shows something we already know : that people happily flit between versions of the same browser , especially home users .
This graph shows browser-family usage .
And it shows a steady decline of IE against FF and Chrome.But again , actually , that 's not the important issue here .
Here 's what matters : the browser war was won when IE 's monopoly was broken .
Developing for just IE used to be a legitimate business practice - you were only alienating 10 \ % of your customers , and most of them had IE on their system anyway .
I remember when all my online banking required IE , as did a bunch of other sites I wanted to use.I could n't care less if Chrome eats FF 's market-share .
If Safari trumps them both .
What matters , what 's important , is the forced interoperability that comes from not having one browser with 90 \ % coverage .
And when that happens , everyone wins : as is rapidly becoming that case .
Each new version of IE becomes more and more standards compliant , because they can no longer abuse their monopoly.-P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone has said elsewhere, the more important issue here is here:http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951 [statcounter.com]The previous graph shows something we already know: that people happily flit between versions of the same browser, especially home users.
This graph shows browser-family usage.
And it shows a steady decline of IE against FF and Chrome.But again, actually, that's not the important issue here.
Here's what matters: the browser war was won when IE's monopoly was broken.
Developing for just IE used to be a legitimate business practice - you were only alienating 10\% of your customers, and most of them had IE on their system anyway.
I remember when all my online banking required IE, as did a bunch of other sites I wanted to use.I couldn't care less if Chrome eats FF's market-share.
If Safari trumps them both.
What matters, what's important, is the forced interoperability that comes from not having one browser with 90\% coverage.
And when that happens, everyone wins: as is rapidly becoming that case.
Each new version of IE becomes more and more standards compliant, because they can no longer abuse their monopoly.-P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508504</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>russlar</author>
	<datestamp>1261324080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey! He stole my idea!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey !
He stole my idea !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey!
He stole my idea!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509398</id>
	<title>And pirate internet caf&#233;s</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261334940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have some web clients in Morocco - they still insist on IE4 !!! compatibility, along with IE5 and IE6, because some of the net caf&#233;s are running clients so old that couldn't run FF even if they wanted to. They refuse to update their machines in the caf&#233;s, and that's where my clients get a load of their hits from. It's not just corporations are dinosaurs. <br>Second anecdote: As my mother-in-law has demonstrated for years, running an "obsolete" OS (Win/ME) and browser actually reduces her virus susceptibility. Security through naive, ignorant cheapness - who would've thunk?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have some web clients in Morocco - they still insist on IE4 ! ! !
compatibility , along with IE5 and IE6 , because some of the net caf   s are running clients so old that could n't run FF even if they wanted to .
They refuse to update their machines in the caf   s , and that 's where my clients get a load of their hits from .
It 's not just corporations are dinosaurs .
Second anecdote : As my mother-in-law has demonstrated for years , running an " obsolete " OS ( Win/ME ) and browser actually reduces her virus susceptibility .
Security through naive , ignorant cheapness - who would 've thunk ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have some web clients in Morocco - they still insist on IE4 !!!
compatibility, along with IE5 and IE6, because some of the net cafés are running clients so old that couldn't run FF even if they wanted to.
They refuse to update their machines in the cafés, and that's where my clients get a load of their hits from.
It's not just corporations are dinosaurs.
Second anecdote: As my mother-in-law has demonstrated for years, running an "obsolete" OS (Win/ME) and browser actually reduces her virus susceptibility.
Security through naive, ignorant cheapness - who would've thunk?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511612</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261408380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ahhhhh, here we go:  <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951" title="statcounter.com" rel="nofollow">http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951</a> [statcounter.com] </p><p>Yes indeed.  Global domination by Firefox is indeed getting closer - but not this year, and probably not next  year.  Let's give it between 3 and 5 years, alright?</p></div><p>Take that graph and extrapolate, and you'll see that if the current trend continues, IE will drop below 50\% next summer and below Firefox next fall or winter. Unless of course there's a 60\% rock bottom of users worldwide who cannot or dare not install a new browser on their Windows computer.</p><p>Other interesting trends are the rise of Chrome (shamefully omitted from the "Browser version" graph, but now as popular as Safari and Opera combined) and the steady decline of Opera. Where's Opera 10 btw?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ahhhhh , here we go : http : //gs.statcounter.com/ # browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951 [ statcounter.com ] Yes indeed .
Global domination by Firefox is indeed getting closer - but not this year , and probably not next year .
Let 's give it between 3 and 5 years , alright ? Take that graph and extrapolate , and you 'll see that if the current trend continues , IE will drop below 50 \ % next summer and below Firefox next fall or winter .
Unless of course there 's a 60 \ % rock bottom of users worldwide who can not or dare not install a new browser on their Windows computer.Other interesting trends are the rise of Chrome ( shamefully omitted from the " Browser version " graph , but now as popular as Safari and Opera combined ) and the steady decline of Opera .
Where 's Opera 10 btw ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ahhhhh, here we go:  http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951 [statcounter.com] Yes indeed.
Global domination by Firefox is indeed getting closer - but not this year, and probably not next  year.
Let's give it between 3 and 5 years, alright?Take that graph and extrapolate, and you'll see that if the current trend continues, IE will drop below 50\% next summer and below Firefox next fall or winter.
Unless of course there's a 60\% rock bottom of users worldwide who cannot or dare not install a new browser on their Windows computer.Other interesting trends are the rise of Chrome (shamefully omitted from the "Browser version" graph, but now as popular as Safari and Opera combined) and the steady decline of Opera.
Where's Opera 10 btw?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517832</id>
	<title>Re:Why MS failed.</title>
	<author>BenoitRen</author>
	<datestamp>1261395480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CSS 2.1 and CSS 3 are finished standards? Since when?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CSS 2.1 and CSS 3 are finished standards ?
Since when ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CSS 2.1 and CSS 3 are finished standards?
Since when?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30519864</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>Simetrical</author>
	<datestamp>1261411320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As the huge 32/64bit transition begins (next 12 to 36 months my guess)</p></div><p>Uh-huh.  Is that like the year of the Linux desktop?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As the huge 32/64bit transition begins ( next 12 to 36 months my guess ) Uh-huh .
Is that like the year of the Linux desktop ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As the huge 32/64bit transition begins (next 12 to 36 months my guess)Uh-huh.
Is that like the year of the Linux desktop?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508252</id>
	<title>Pretty deceiving</title>
	<author>idontusenumbers</author>
	<datestamp>1261321260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If any of the IE versions had automatic updating to the latest version like Firefox has, IE would easily win.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If any of the IE versions had automatic updating to the latest version like Firefox has , IE would easily win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If any of the IE versions had automatic updating to the latest version like Firefox has, IE would easily win.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509154</id>
	<title>Re:One word: adblock</title>
	<author>WuphonsReach</author>
	<datestamp>1261331520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>What would happen if you succeed and convert all internet users to firefox + adblock?</i> <br>
<br>
That's sorta why I go for NoScript + FlashBlock over AdBlock.  Ads still display - unless they are powered by Javascript or Flash.  So if your ad is a simple image or block of text, I'll still see it.  But it won't annoy the heck out of me.<br>
<br>
(The bigger reason I run NoScript/FlashBlock is to avoid malware being installed via Javascript / Flash.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>What would happen if you succeed and convert all internet users to firefox + adblock ?
That 's sorta why I go for NoScript + FlashBlock over AdBlock .
Ads still display - unless they are powered by Javascript or Flash .
So if your ad is a simple image or block of text , I 'll still see it .
But it wo n't annoy the heck out of me .
( The bigger reason I run NoScript/FlashBlock is to avoid malware being installed via Javascript / Flash .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would happen if you succeed and convert all internet users to firefox + adblock?
That's sorta why I go for NoScript + FlashBlock over AdBlock.
Ads still display - unless they are powered by Javascript or Flash.
So if your ad is a simple image or block of text, I'll still see it.
But it won't annoy the heck out of me.
(The bigger reason I run NoScript/FlashBlock is to avoid malware being installed via Javascript / Flash.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508728</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510186</id>
	<title>Re:so....?</title>
	<author>Randle\_Revar</author>
	<datestamp>1261391580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ink blot?</p><p>Anyway FF is improving faster than IE. And anyway IE started so far behind that it would be v10 or 11 at a minimum before it equaled even current FF.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ink blot ? Anyway FF is improving faster than IE .
And anyway IE started so far behind that it would be v10 or 11 at a minimum before it equaled even current FF .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ink blot?Anyway FF is improving faster than IE.
And anyway IE started so far behind that it would be v10 or 11 at a minimum before it equaled even current FF.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508548</id>
	<title>because of 'delete recent history'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261324500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bet it is because it has 'delete recent history' for certain periods of time, so it makes it easier to look at pr0n.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet it is because it has 'delete recent history ' for certain periods of time , so it makes it easier to look at pr0n .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet it is because it has 'delete recent history' for certain periods of time, so it makes it easier to look at pr0n.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509820</id>
	<title>Re:Precise Title.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261428480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man there's a "Browser" page and a "Browser Version" page thats misleading to try and make it look like FF is suddenly the biggest browser out there. Its in the article itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man there 's a " Browser " page and a " Browser Version " page thats misleading to try and make it look like FF is suddenly the biggest browser out there .
Its in the article itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man there's a "Browser" page and a "Browser Version" page thats misleading to try and make it look like FF is suddenly the biggest browser out there.
Its in the article itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30522032</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>frsmith</author>
	<datestamp>1261480560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That exactly what I do for the less techies. Works a charm.<br>
I never get asked where is IE!<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
Bob</htmltext>
<tokenext>That exactly what I do for the less techies .
Works a charm .
I never get asked where is IE !
Cheers Bob</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That exactly what I do for the less techies.
Works a charm.
I never get asked where is IE!
Cheers
Bob</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30520438</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261416660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Separating the versions of the various browsers just clutters the picture.</p><p>IE6, IE7, and IE8 are completely different browsers though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Separating the versions of the various browsers just clutters the picture.IE6 , IE7 , and IE8 are completely different browsers though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Separating the versions of the various browsers just clutters the picture.IE6, IE7, and IE8 are completely different browsers though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513190</id>
	<title>Re:Only reason for any IE6 market share</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261416480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not true - I know from personal experience that a lot of big businesses (in the UK at least) use IE6 because of at least one of<br>a) Internal IT not allowing use of anything else<br>b) Requiring to use systems that don't work on anything else</p><p>The NHS, for example, use some systems that were developed specifically for them and that do not work on anything that is not IE6. That causes us problems because it means our product must work on IE6 as well as the other browsers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not true - I know from personal experience that a lot of big businesses ( in the UK at least ) use IE6 because of at least one ofa ) Internal IT not allowing use of anything elseb ) Requiring to use systems that do n't work on anything elseThe NHS , for example , use some systems that were developed specifically for them and that do not work on anything that is not IE6 .
That causes us problems because it means our product must work on IE6 as well as the other browsers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not true - I know from personal experience that a lot of big businesses (in the UK at least) use IE6 because of at least one ofa) Internal IT not allowing use of anything elseb) Requiring to use systems that don't work on anything elseThe NHS, for example, use some systems that were developed specifically for them and that do not work on anything that is not IE6.
That causes us problems because it means our product must work on IE6 as well as the other browsers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513654</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261418520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's going great! Reminds me of 1996.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's going great !
Reminds me of 1996. ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's going great!
Reminds me of 1996. ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508932</id>
	<title>Non uniform adoption across countries?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261329300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I live in Japan and adoption seems really conservative.
Let's first take version numbers away to get a better view.
<br>
Japan<br>
Firefox has been having a 21-23\% share for the 2 years, with IE still leading though dropping from 70 to 65\%<br>
Growth in conservative. UK seems to have a similar trend.<br>
<br>
Singapore<br>
About 30\% share and growth is conservative.<br>
<br>
Malaysia <br>
Growth from 30\% up to 40\%, with an equal drop in IE share.<br>
This looks like a market where Firefox can overtake IE?<br>
<br>
France<br>
very interesting trend. W38 2008 and W26 2009 had a short period where IE use was displaced by Firefox, but IE use was resumed in a few weeks.<br>
Does that mean users in France are open to the idea, but still don't deem Firefox a good replacement yet?<br>
Interestingly Vietnam seems to have a similar trend.<br>
<br>
China<br>
IE has 95\% share all the way, with a drop recently, giving way not to Firefox, but to Maxthon.<br>
<br>
Poland / Finland<br>
Firefox is the most popular browser!<br>
<br>
North Korea<br>
Nobody really wins. Only IE, once in a while.<br>
<br>
Antartica<br>
Go figure. But firefox seems to be winning?<br>
<br>
It would be nice if we could have a world map of the most popular browsers in each country<br>
so we can adjust our expectations when talking to overseas partners...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in Japan and adoption seems really conservative .
Let 's first take version numbers away to get a better view .
Japan Firefox has been having a 21-23 \ % share for the 2 years , with IE still leading though dropping from 70 to 65 \ % Growth in conservative .
UK seems to have a similar trend .
Singapore About 30 \ % share and growth is conservative .
Malaysia Growth from 30 \ % up to 40 \ % , with an equal drop in IE share .
This looks like a market where Firefox can overtake IE ?
France very interesting trend .
W38 2008 and W26 2009 had a short period where IE use was displaced by Firefox , but IE use was resumed in a few weeks .
Does that mean users in France are open to the idea , but still do n't deem Firefox a good replacement yet ?
Interestingly Vietnam seems to have a similar trend .
China IE has 95 \ % share all the way , with a drop recently , giving way not to Firefox , but to Maxthon .
Poland / Finland Firefox is the most popular browser !
North Korea Nobody really wins .
Only IE , once in a while .
Antartica Go figure .
But firefox seems to be winning ?
It would be nice if we could have a world map of the most popular browsers in each country so we can adjust our expectations when talking to overseas partners.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in Japan and adoption seems really conservative.
Let's first take version numbers away to get a better view.
Japan
Firefox has been having a 21-23\% share for the 2 years, with IE still leading though dropping from 70 to 65\%
Growth in conservative.
UK seems to have a similar trend.
Singapore
About 30\% share and growth is conservative.
Malaysia 
Growth from 30\% up to 40\%, with an equal drop in IE share.
This looks like a market where Firefox can overtake IE?
France
very interesting trend.
W38 2008 and W26 2009 had a short period where IE use was displaced by Firefox, but IE use was resumed in a few weeks.
Does that mean users in France are open to the idea, but still don't deem Firefox a good replacement yet?
Interestingly Vietnam seems to have a similar trend.
China
IE has 95\% share all the way, with a drop recently, giving way not to Firefox, but to Maxthon.
Poland / Finland
Firefox is the most popular browser!
North Korea
Nobody really wins.
Only IE, once in a while.
Antartica
Go figure.
But firefox seems to be winning?
It would be nice if we could have a world map of the most popular browsers in each country
so we can adjust our expectations when talking to overseas partners...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509948</id>
	<title>Re:Only reason for any IE6 market share</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1261387260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Insightful? Ignorant.</p><p>Go look up XP torrents. Most come slipstreamed with IE7.</p><p>Much more likely to be corporate users, or people that ignore the little yellow shield.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Insightful ?
Ignorant.Go look up XP torrents .
Most come slipstreamed with IE7.Much more likely to be corporate users , or people that ignore the little yellow shield .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Insightful?
Ignorant.Go look up XP torrents.
Most come slipstreamed with IE7.Much more likely to be corporate users, or people that ignore the little yellow shield.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30514114</id>
	<title>IE Leads</title>
	<author>sc0p3</author>
	<datestamp>1261420560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Realistically IE is still leading - when you add up all the IE and FF versions Microsoft is still at 50\% dominance, FF trailing with 32\%.

Plus once Chrome gets a foothold it will sweep up the ranks (eating up the FF share), it loads in half the time of FF.

You can't claim victory until the fat lady sings.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Realistically IE is still leading - when you add up all the IE and FF versions Microsoft is still at 50 \ % dominance , FF trailing with 32 \ % .
Plus once Chrome gets a foothold it will sweep up the ranks ( eating up the FF share ) , it loads in half the time of FF .
You ca n't claim victory until the fat lady sings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Realistically IE is still leading - when you add up all the IE and FF versions Microsoft is still at 50\% dominance, FF trailing with 32\%.
Plus once Chrome gets a foothold it will sweep up the ranks (eating up the FF share), it loads in half the time of FF.
You can't claim victory until the fat lady sings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510494</id>
	<title>Re:One word: adblock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261395720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was never even aware there were ads on slashdot O\_o</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was never even aware there were ads on slashdot O \ _o</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was never even aware there were ads on slashdot O\_o</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184</id>
	<title>Only reason for any IE6 market share</title>
	<author>Old Flatulent 1</author>
	<datestamp>1261320540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seems to me IE6 having any market share at all is because of the huge number of XP non registered copies floating around in places like China and even the US. Besides how would bot nets survive without Windows warez! Hopefully as HTML5 becomes more developed it will kill it once and for all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems to me IE6 having any market share at all is because of the huge number of XP non registered copies floating around in places like China and even the US .
Besides how would bot nets survive without Windows warez !
Hopefully as HTML5 becomes more developed it will kill it once and for all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems to me IE6 having any market share at all is because of the huge number of XP non registered copies floating around in places like China and even the US.
Besides how would bot nets survive without Windows warez!
Hopefully as HTML5 becomes more developed it will kill it once and for all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508294</id>
	<title>Misleading Title.</title>
	<author>bjorniac</author>
	<datestamp>1261321620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A more accurate graph for the "Most Popular Browser Worldwide" would be given by:<br><a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951" title="statcounter.com">http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951</a> [statcounter.com]<br>Here you see a more representative picture - IE's decline and Firefox's rise, but still IE's total share is 55\% to Firefox's 32\%</p><p>Just because we're in the midst of an IE upgrade from 7-8 doesn't make Firefox now the most popular browser. Sure, this version is currently a little ahead of each of IE7 and IE8, but to me what this really indicates is that Firefox users upgrade faster.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A more accurate graph for the " Most Popular Browser Worldwide " would be given by : http : //gs.statcounter.com/ # browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951 [ statcounter.com ] Here you see a more representative picture - IE 's decline and Firefox 's rise , but still IE 's total share is 55 \ % to Firefox 's 32 \ % Just because we 're in the midst of an IE upgrade from 7-8 does n't make Firefox now the most popular browser .
Sure , this version is currently a little ahead of each of IE7 and IE8 , but to me what this really indicates is that Firefox users upgrade faster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A more accurate graph for the "Most Popular Browser Worldwide" would be given by:http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951 [statcounter.com]Here you see a more representative picture - IE's decline and Firefox's rise, but still IE's total share is 55\% to Firefox's 32\%Just because we're in the midst of an IE upgrade from 7-8 doesn't make Firefox now the most popular browser.
Sure, this version is currently a little ahead of each of IE7 and IE8, but to me what this really indicates is that Firefox users upgrade faster.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508224</id>
	<title>This is silly...</title>
	<author>SwashbucklingCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1261320960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Separating out versions of different browsers is just plain silly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Separating out versions of different browsers is just plain silly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Separating out versions of different browsers is just plain silly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509434</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>nebulus4</author>
	<datestamp>1261335300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Policies might be dumb, admins might be lazy, but all this is not what is keeping IE6 alive. The reason is quite simple: Upgrades cost money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Policies might be dumb , admins might be lazy , but all this is not what is keeping IE6 alive .
The reason is quite simple : Upgrades cost money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Policies might be dumb, admins might be lazy, but all this is not what is keeping IE6 alive.
The reason is quite simple: Upgrades cost money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508654</id>
	<title>That or web site developers</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1261325820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unless you're a web browser developer, keeping track of global browser market-shares is just plain nerdy.</p> </div><p>That or a web <em>site</em> developer like myself. Tracking the fall of IE 6 is important because the engine powering IE 6 supports far less of the coming HTML5 standard than the other possibilities (Mozilla Gecko, Apple WebKit, and Opera Presto).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless you 're a web browser developer , keeping track of global browser market-shares is just plain nerdy .
That or a web site developer like myself .
Tracking the fall of IE 6 is important because the engine powering IE 6 supports far less of the coming HTML5 standard than the other possibilities ( Mozilla Gecko , Apple WebKit , and Opera Presto ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless you're a web browser developer, keeping track of global browser market-shares is just plain nerdy.
That or a web site developer like myself.
Tracking the fall of IE 6 is important because the engine powering IE 6 supports far less of the coming HTML5 standard than the other possibilities (Mozilla Gecko, Apple WebKit, and Opera Presto).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508310</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261321800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The real story here is in the trends of each version.  IE7 and IE6 are in decline.  For Internet Explorer, only IE8 is still growing, but its rate of growth is significantly slower than Firefox's.  The headline may be misleading, but the the summary is right on the money.  If these trends keep up, the headline may well become true a lot sooner than you seem to think.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The real story here is in the trends of each version .
IE7 and IE6 are in decline .
For Internet Explorer , only IE8 is still growing , but its rate of growth is significantly slower than Firefox 's .
The headline may be misleading , but the the summary is right on the money .
If these trends keep up , the headline may well become true a lot sooner than you seem to think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real story here is in the trends of each version.
IE7 and IE6 are in decline.
For Internet Explorer, only IE8 is still growing, but its rate of growth is significantly slower than Firefox's.
The headline may be misleading, but the the summary is right on the money.
If these trends keep up, the headline may well become true a lot sooner than you seem to think.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510600</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1261397100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea, I realized a while back that for a travel site anyone using IE6 was either too technologically backwards to do online businesses or too cheap to have any money to do it. The remaining people are on corporate networks, and just wasting company time wishing they were somewhere else (big spikes around 4-5 PM from each time zone) or wishing they had a real browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea , I realized a while back that for a travel site anyone using IE6 was either too technologically backwards to do online businesses or too cheap to have any money to do it .
The remaining people are on corporate networks , and just wasting company time wishing they were somewhere else ( big spikes around 4-5 PM from each time zone ) or wishing they had a real browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea, I realized a while back that for a travel site anyone using IE6 was either too technologically backwards to do online businesses or too cheap to have any money to do it.
The remaining people are on corporate networks, and just wasting company time wishing they were somewhere else (big spikes around 4-5 PM from each time zone) or wishing they had a real browser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509710</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>ProfessionalCookie</author>
	<datestamp>1261426620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I usually title it thusly:<p>Firefox<br>(Internet)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I usually title it thusly : Firefox ( Internet )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I usually title it thusly:Firefox(Internet)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512940</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261415520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Move your sig to the sig field, dipshit. Let us filter it out. What's wrong with you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Move your sig to the sig field , dipshit .
Let us filter it out .
What 's wrong with you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Move your sig to the sig field, dipshit.
Let us filter it out.
What's wrong with you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513448</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1261417680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Versions do matter, especially for IE because significant differences exist between the versions that make it difficult to target all versions at once..<br>Other browsers tend to add support for new standards in an incremental fashion so merely not using anything not supported by an older version typically ensures support for older versions.<br>IE on the other hand has significant differences between versions such that you need to be careful, designing specifically for 6 will often create sites that don't work correctly in 7 or 8 (or any other browser for that matter)...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Versions do matter , especially for IE because significant differences exist between the versions that make it difficult to target all versions at once..Other browsers tend to add support for new standards in an incremental fashion so merely not using anything not supported by an older version typically ensures support for older versions.IE on the other hand has significant differences between versions such that you need to be careful , designing specifically for 6 will often create sites that do n't work correctly in 7 or 8 ( or any other browser for that matter ) .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Versions do matter, especially for IE because significant differences exist between the versions that make it difficult to target all versions at once..Other browsers tend to add support for new standards in an incremental fashion so merely not using anything not supported by an older version typically ensures support for older versions.IE on the other hand has significant differences between versions such that you need to be careful, designing specifically for 6 will often create sites that don't work correctly in 7 or 8 (or any other browser for that matter)...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508334</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261322100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; The only situation where I would use that junk is if I had a software lock-down at work</p><p>That's a nontrivial part of IE6 usage, yes.  An interesting plot of IE usage vs time from June 2008 to June 2009, with both moving averages and day-by-day numbers plotted shows that a third of IE6 usage is precisely work-day usage: <a href="http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2009/06/one\_year\_of\_int.html" title="mozillazine.org">http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2009/06/one\_year\_of\_int.html</a> [mozillazine.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; The only situation where I would use that junk is if I had a software lock-down at workThat 's a nontrivial part of IE6 usage , yes .
An interesting plot of IE usage vs time from June 2008 to June 2009 , with both moving averages and day-by-day numbers plotted shows that a third of IE6 usage is precisely work-day usage : http : //weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2009/06/one \ _year \ _of \ _int.html [ mozillazine.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; The only situation where I would use that junk is if I had a software lock-down at workThat's a nontrivial part of IE6 usage, yes.
An interesting plot of IE usage vs time from June 2008 to June 2009, with both moving averages and day-by-day numbers plotted shows that a third of IE6 usage is precisely work-day usage: http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2009/06/one\_year\_of\_int.html [mozillazine.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508320</id>
	<title>I added another FF user today</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261321980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I helped a family friend setup their new computer (which had Windows 7 on it) and the first thing I did was download Firefox 3.5, installed the IE Aero theme and removed any references to IE I could find. The nice thing with this theme is very few non-technical users notice a difference other than their browser seems to load pages faster.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I helped a family friend setup their new computer ( which had Windows 7 on it ) and the first thing I did was download Firefox 3.5 , installed the IE Aero theme and removed any references to IE I could find .
The nice thing with this theme is very few non-technical users notice a difference other than their browser seems to load pages faster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I helped a family friend setup their new computer (which had Windows 7 on it) and the first thing I did was download Firefox 3.5, installed the IE Aero theme and removed any references to IE I could find.
The nice thing with this theme is very few non-technical users notice a difference other than their browser seems to load pages faster.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508358</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261322520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>IE8 [comes] with Win7<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... You're going to see IE8 be absolutely huge over the next 5 years </p></div><p>Hopefully not in <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/12/18/0210240/How-Europes-Mandated-Browser-Ballot-Screen-Works" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Europe</a> [slashdot.org] </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>IE8 [ comes ] with Win7 ... You 're going to see IE8 be absolutely huge over the next 5 years Hopefully not in Europe [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE8 [comes] with Win7 ... You're going to see IE8 be absolutely huge over the next 5 years Hopefully not in Europe [slashdot.org] 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512248</id>
	<title>IE6 will still be around</title>
	<author>MistrBlank</author>
	<datestamp>1261412040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So long as (stupidly) company internal apps require the browser for "compatibility".  It's that way where I work, and it's stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So long as ( stupidly ) company internal apps require the browser for " compatibility " .
It 's that way where I work , and it 's stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So long as (stupidly) company internal apps require the browser for "compatibility".
It's that way where I work, and it's stupid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508424</id>
	<title>Statcounter is bullshit!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1261323240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are blocked in all ad blockers and some firewall software (those with built-in malware filters).<br>This is because of their web beacons that they integrate into sites, and that invade your privacy by tracking you across sites.</p><p>I had to turn off my ad blocker, to be able to open their site.</p><p>So you can guess in what direction the statistics are biased.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are blocked in all ad blockers and some firewall software ( those with built-in malware filters ) .This is because of their web beacons that they integrate into sites , and that invade your privacy by tracking you across sites.I had to turn off my ad blocker , to be able to open their site.So you can guess in what direction the statistics are biased .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are blocked in all ad blockers and some firewall software (those with built-in malware filters).This is because of their web beacons that they integrate into sites, and that invade your privacy by tracking you across sites.I had to turn off my ad blocker, to be able to open their site.So you can guess in what direction the statistics are biased.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511382</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>halcyon1234</author>
	<datestamp>1261406940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's hardly a fair comparison. To be completely fair and balanced, the browser usage stats should come from a different page outside of your control.  I think <a href="http://runonce.msn.com/runonce2.aspx" title="msn.com">http://runonce.msn.com/runonce2.aspx</a> [msn.com] would present the sort of unbiased sample base we'd expect from a browser-war data set.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's hardly a fair comparison .
To be completely fair and balanced , the browser usage stats should come from a different page outside of your control .
I think http : //runonce.msn.com/runonce2.aspx [ msn.com ] would present the sort of unbiased sample base we 'd expect from a browser-war data set .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's hardly a fair comparison.
To be completely fair and balanced, the browser usage stats should come from a different page outside of your control.
I think http://runonce.msn.com/runonce2.aspx [msn.com] would present the sort of unbiased sample base we'd expect from a browser-war data set.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508410</id>
	<title>Obligatory xkcd post</title>
	<author>zill</author>
	<datestamp>1261323120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://xkcd.com/198/" title="xkcd.com" rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/198/</a> [xkcd.com] <br> <br>

Unless you're a web browser developer, keeping track of global browser market-shares is just plain nerdy. But then again, this <b>is</b><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/..</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //xkcd.com/198/ [ xkcd.com ] Unless you 're a web browser developer , keeping track of global browser market-shares is just plain nerdy .
But then again , this is /. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://xkcd.com/198/ [xkcd.com]  

Unless you're a web browser developer, keeping track of global browser market-shares is just plain nerdy.
But then again, this is /..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30523202</id>
	<title>Re:Why MS failed.</title>
	<author>Ol Olsoc</author>
	<datestamp>1261494840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did something happen to your comma key?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did something happen to your comma key ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did something happen to your comma key?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508924</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>Max Littlemore</author>
	<datestamp>1261329180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For what it's worth, I work for one of the state govt's of Australia and one of our departments has just switched from Win2k to XP<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/ so I'm guessing we won't be moving to Windows 7 for at least 2 years.</p></div></blockquote><p>Care to name the state and department? If it's the state I live in, I'd like to write a letter about this to my member. In fact that's so outrageous I might even get around to writing a letter to someone from Parliament.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For what it 's worth , I work for one of the state govt 's of Australia and one of our departments has just switched from Win2k to XP : / so I 'm guessing we wo n't be moving to Windows 7 for at least 2 years.Care to name the state and department ?
If it 's the state I live in , I 'd like to write a letter about this to my member .
In fact that 's so outrageous I might even get around to writing a letter to someone from Parliament .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For what it's worth, I work for one of the state govt's of Australia and one of our departments has just switched from Win2k to XP :/ so I'm guessing we won't be moving to Windows 7 for at least 2 years.Care to name the state and department?
If it's the state I live in, I'd like to write a letter about this to my member.
In fact that's so outrageous I might even get around to writing a letter to someone from Parliament.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513546</id>
	<title>search browser, !browser version</title>
	<author>archshade</author>
	<datestamp>1261418100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not sure changed the statistics box from browser version to browser and IE is still top<br>

IE8 and IE7 have 20\% each according to TFA<br>
scarier still IE6 has 16\%.<br>
<br>
All I think this shows is that Firefox users (which make up 32\% of the market are more likely to upgrade to the latest version than IE users (who make up 56\% of the market)<br>
<br>
Sorry but it seems to early to be celebrating victory yet.
<br>
<br>
PS: How do the compilers of this data cope with people using User Agent Switching.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure changed the statistics box from browser version to browser and IE is still top IE8 and IE7 have 20 \ % each according to TFA scarier still IE6 has 16 \ % .
All I think this shows is that Firefox users ( which make up 32 \ % of the market are more likely to upgrade to the latest version than IE users ( who make up 56 \ % of the market ) Sorry but it seems to early to be celebrating victory yet .
PS : How do the compilers of this data cope with people using User Agent Switching .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure changed the statistics box from browser version to browser and IE is still top

IE8 and IE7 have 20\% each according to TFA
scarier still IE6 has 16\%.
All I think this shows is that Firefox users (which make up 32\% of the market are more likely to upgrade to the latest version than IE users (who make up 56\% of the market)

Sorry but it seems to early to be celebrating victory yet.
PS: How do the compilers of this data cope with people using User Agent Switching.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>dakameleon</author>
	<datestamp>1261329480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Considering most Firefox users are more tech savvy than average and many of them are likely to have already blocked StatCounter altogether, this is impressive.</p></div><p>Statcounter uses an image as a fallback for getting stats where the cookie is blocked or Javascript cannot be run, so unless you've blocked all third party images (how's the text web going for you, tinfoil hat man?) it still shows up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering most Firefox users are more tech savvy than average and many of them are likely to have already blocked StatCounter altogether , this is impressive.Statcounter uses an image as a fallback for getting stats where the cookie is blocked or Javascript can not be run , so unless you 've blocked all third party images ( how 's the text web going for you , tinfoil hat man ?
) it still shows up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering most Firefox users are more tech savvy than average and many of them are likely to have already blocked StatCounter altogether, this is impressive.Statcounter uses an image as a fallback for getting stats where the cookie is blocked or Javascript cannot be run, so unless you've blocked all third party images (how's the text web going for you, tinfoil hat man?
) it still shows up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510646</id>
	<title>Re:I added another FF user today</title>
	<author>speculatrix</author>
	<datestamp>1261397820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I do the same; except I also install thunderbird and remove all the links to outlook express (OE) or windows mail. To stop programs trying to invoke OE, I change the privileges on the file to remove the execute bit!
<p>
In TBird I change to only send plain text email, as that removes the temptation to pollute the internet with humongous ugly emails.
</p><p>
In FireFox I install flashblock so they aren't hit by drive-by infections, I also usually remove all the Microsoft originated shortcuts/favourites too, and set their home page to google.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do the same ; except I also install thunderbird and remove all the links to outlook express ( OE ) or windows mail .
To stop programs trying to invoke OE , I change the privileges on the file to remove the execute bit !
In TBird I change to only send plain text email , as that removes the temptation to pollute the internet with humongous ugly emails .
In FireFox I install flashblock so they are n't hit by drive-by infections , I also usually remove all the Microsoft originated shortcuts/favourites too , and set their home page to google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do the same; except I also install thunderbird and remove all the links to outlook express (OE) or windows mail.
To stop programs trying to invoke OE, I change the privileges on the file to remove the execute bit!
In TBird I change to only send plain text email, as that removes the temptation to pollute the internet with humongous ugly emails.
In FireFox I install flashblock so they aren't hit by drive-by infections, I also usually remove all the Microsoft originated shortcuts/favourites too, and set their home page to google.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276</id>
	<title>My plan worked</title>
	<author>palmerj3</author>
	<datestamp>1261321500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>Reenactment - relative has problem with computer</b>
<br>
<br>
1. Remove shortcuts to Internet Explorer
<br>
2. Rename Firefox shortcuts to "Internet"

<br> <br>

Firefox 3.5 - My Idea</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reenactment - relative has problem with computer 1 .
Remove shortcuts to Internet Explorer 2 .
Rename Firefox shortcuts to " Internet " Firefox 3.5 - My Idea</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reenactment - relative has problem with computer


1.
Remove shortcuts to Internet Explorer

2.
Rename Firefox shortcuts to "Internet"

 

Firefox 3.5 - My Idea</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509394</id>
	<title>Re:Why MS failed.</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1261334880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure what you mean, if 'few' have upgraded, then considering the OS statistics, why is IE  7 and 8 doing well, and 6 not?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure what you mean , if 'few ' have upgraded , then considering the OS statistics , why is IE 7 and 8 doing well , and 6 not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure what you mean, if 'few' have upgraded, then considering the OS statistics, why is IE  7 and 8 doing well, and 6 not?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511320</id>
	<title>The title is misleading</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261406220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All IE versions are still used more than the double than all Firefox versions. The news is only to that Firefox version... and I'm not sure where is the news here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All IE versions are still used more than the double than all Firefox versions .
The news is only to that Firefox version... and I 'm not sure where is the news here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All IE versions are still used more than the double than all Firefox versions.
The news is only to that Firefox version... and I'm not sure where is the news here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509088</id>
	<title>Firefox will never be adopted in Korea</title>
	<author>incognito84</author>
	<datestamp>1261330920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most Korean websites are designed to only work in IE and since XP is still the OS of choice, most people use IE6.
<br>
<br>
Many people have this misconception of Korea as being some kind of computer mecca. It is and it isn't. Internet penetration and PC ownership here are much higher, as is the countries investment in all things technology related but I'd venture to say that, like back home, most people here don't really know how to get the most out of their PCs or the internet.
<br>
<br>
At my job here in Korea I was running Windows 7 and Firefox. The IT guy got wind of this as I use a work laptop that is not my own (though I do take it home) and had me reinstall XP and instructed me not to use Firefox "because it has a lot of viruses." As for Windows 7, he just had no idea what it was and insisted I switch to XP.
<br>
<br>
Given this attitude in most places, even in the notorious "PC Bangs", I doubt Firefox will be taken up here any time soon. Especially since most Korean websites would need to be redone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most Korean websites are designed to only work in IE and since XP is still the OS of choice , most people use IE6 .
Many people have this misconception of Korea as being some kind of computer mecca .
It is and it is n't .
Internet penetration and PC ownership here are much higher , as is the countries investment in all things technology related but I 'd venture to say that , like back home , most people here do n't really know how to get the most out of their PCs or the internet .
At my job here in Korea I was running Windows 7 and Firefox .
The IT guy got wind of this as I use a work laptop that is not my own ( though I do take it home ) and had me reinstall XP and instructed me not to use Firefox " because it has a lot of viruses .
" As for Windows 7 , he just had no idea what it was and insisted I switch to XP .
Given this attitude in most places , even in the notorious " PC Bangs " , I doubt Firefox will be taken up here any time soon .
Especially since most Korean websites would need to be redone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most Korean websites are designed to only work in IE and since XP is still the OS of choice, most people use IE6.
Many people have this misconception of Korea as being some kind of computer mecca.
It is and it isn't.
Internet penetration and PC ownership here are much higher, as is the countries investment in all things technology related but I'd venture to say that, like back home, most people here don't really know how to get the most out of their PCs or the internet.
At my job here in Korea I was running Windows 7 and Firefox.
The IT guy got wind of this as I use a work laptop that is not my own (though I do take it home) and had me reinstall XP and instructed me not to use Firefox "because it has a lot of viruses.
" As for Windows 7, he just had no idea what it was and insisted I switch to XP.
Given this attitude in most places, even in the notorious "PC Bangs", I doubt Firefox will be taken up here any time soon.
Especially since most Korean websites would need to be redone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510642</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1261397700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have actually on more than one occasion changed the entire underlying OS to Linux, copied the IE icons, email, and word icons on to the desktop, and simply told them it is was fixed. Some of those computers are still running just fine 4-5 years later without a problem. The users (mostly grandmothers) rave about the way I fixed their computers to their friends and refuse to buy a new one. So, Linux is ready for the desktop and grandma, with the right icons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have actually on more than one occasion changed the entire underlying OS to Linux , copied the IE icons , email , and word icons on to the desktop , and simply told them it is was fixed .
Some of those computers are still running just fine 4-5 years later without a problem .
The users ( mostly grandmothers ) rave about the way I fixed their computers to their friends and refuse to buy a new one .
So , Linux is ready for the desktop and grandma , with the right icons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have actually on more than one occasion changed the entire underlying OS to Linux, copied the IE icons, email, and word icons on to the desktop, and simply told them it is was fixed.
Some of those computers are still running just fine 4-5 years later without a problem.
The users (mostly grandmothers) rave about the way I fixed their computers to their friends and refuse to buy a new one.
So, Linux is ready for the desktop and grandma, with the right icons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510034</id>
	<title>Non-conformist</title>
	<author>ikono</author>
	<datestamp>1261388640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whelp, now to find a new browser now that firefox is the most popular! Can't have me using what's popular, now can I?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whelp , now to find a new browser now that firefox is the most popular !
Ca n't have me using what 's popular , now can I ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whelp, now to find a new browser now that firefox is the most popular!
Can't have me using what's popular, now can I?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509164</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>Tordek</author>
	<datestamp>1261331640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More than half of a sample can be above or below average. Exactly half will be above and below the median.</p><p>If you have [13, 13, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20], the average is 15 and the median is 14. Only 3 numbers are above average, while 5 are below. OTOH, exactly 4 numbers are above median, and 4 numbers are below median.</p><p>You might want to rethink that statement in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More than half of a sample can be above or below average .
Exactly half will be above and below the median.If you have [ 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 18 , 20 ] , the average is 15 and the median is 14 .
Only 3 numbers are above average , while 5 are below .
OTOH , exactly 4 numbers are above median , and 4 numbers are below median.You might want to rethink that statement in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More than half of a sample can be above or below average.
Exactly half will be above and below the median.If you have [13, 13, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20], the average is 15 and the median is 14.
Only 3 numbers are above average, while 5 are below.
OTOH, exactly 4 numbers are above median, and 4 numbers are below median.You might want to rethink that statement in the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512848</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>Billkamm</author>
	<datestamp>1261415160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IE still dominates the world.  I think separating every possible version of each browser and calling it a different browse is a little bit of funny math.   A lot of politicking going on here in favor of Firefox.</p><p>Call me when the Firefox (all versions) surpasses IE (all versions).   If you put me in a Firefox 3.0 browser and a Firefox 3.5 browser I couldn't tell you which one I was using without going to Help --&gt; About.   I can barely tell the difference between IE7 and IE8 without going to Help --&gt; About.   The average end user doesn't distinguish to themself "I'm using IE8" or "I'm using Firefox 3.5"   They just say I'm using IE or I'm using Firefox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IE still dominates the world .
I think separating every possible version of each browser and calling it a different browse is a little bit of funny math .
A lot of politicking going on here in favor of Firefox.Call me when the Firefox ( all versions ) surpasses IE ( all versions ) .
If you put me in a Firefox 3.0 browser and a Firefox 3.5 browser I could n't tell you which one I was using without going to Help -- &gt; About .
I can barely tell the difference between IE7 and IE8 without going to Help -- &gt; About .
The average end user does n't distinguish to themself " I 'm using IE8 " or " I 'm using Firefox 3.5 " They just say I 'm using IE or I 'm using Firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE still dominates the world.
I think separating every possible version of each browser and calling it a different browse is a little bit of funny math.
A lot of politicking going on here in favor of Firefox.Call me when the Firefox (all versions) surpasses IE (all versions).
If you put me in a Firefox 3.0 browser and a Firefox 3.5 browser I couldn't tell you which one I was using without going to Help --&gt; About.
I can barely tell the difference between IE7 and IE8 without going to Help --&gt; About.
The average end user doesn't distinguish to themself "I'm using IE8" or "I'm using Firefox 3.5"   They just say I'm using IE or I'm using Firefox.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508774</id>
	<title>Maybe you can</title>
	<author>gearloos</author>
	<datestamp>1261327440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After all these years hearing the BS about I.E. being so popular.... This is proof, maybe you can fix stupid. People have come around.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After all these years hearing the BS about I.E .
being so popular.... This is proof , maybe you can fix stupid .
People have come around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After all these years hearing the BS about I.E.
being so popular.... This is proof, maybe you can fix stupid.
People have come around.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508216</id>
	<title>Ah, I.E. single handedly holding back the web</title>
	<author>Mr Thinly Sliced</author>
	<datestamp>1261320900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks Microsoft, and some congratulations should also go to America for supporting them!</p><p>(Look at the browser share stats for example).</p><p>Personally, I blame it all on the Marketing people.</p><p>Ah, say the marketing people, he's going for that "anti-microsoft" dollar. Big dollar, big market, very smart of him to go for that.</p><p>(Props to Bill Hicks. How we miss thee, Bill)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks Microsoft , and some congratulations should also go to America for supporting them !
( Look at the browser share stats for example ) .Personally , I blame it all on the Marketing people.Ah , say the marketing people , he 's going for that " anti-microsoft " dollar .
Big dollar , big market , very smart of him to go for that .
( Props to Bill Hicks .
How we miss thee , Bill )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks Microsoft, and some congratulations should also go to America for supporting them!
(Look at the browser share stats for example).Personally, I blame it all on the Marketing people.Ah, say the marketing people, he's going for that "anti-microsoft" dollar.
Big dollar, big market, very smart of him to go for that.
(Props to Bill Hicks.
How we miss thee, Bill)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509426</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261335240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Win7 comes with a 64bit and a 32 bit IE8. And flash doesn't really work in the 64bit version. So your 12 month prediction is probably optimistic (the low end of your guess I know). There are still a large number of significant problems with software while running a 64 bit OS. I'm sure most of them you can overcome but for people like Dell and HP?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... They will be releasing things in 32bit until they run into physical limitations. (Which wont be for a bit still on office type machines). And without the big boys switching over we'll continue to see many problems in the software.<br> <br>Think IPv6... Its been<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... 20years? And there still isn't huge adoption.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Win7 comes with a 64bit and a 32 bit IE8 .
And flash does n't really work in the 64bit version .
So your 12 month prediction is probably optimistic ( the low end of your guess I know ) .
There are still a large number of significant problems with software while running a 64 bit OS .
I 'm sure most of them you can overcome but for people like Dell and HP ?
... They will be releasing things in 32bit until they run into physical limitations .
( Which wont be for a bit still on office type machines ) .
And without the big boys switching over we 'll continue to see many problems in the software .
Think IPv6... Its been ... 20years ? And there still is n't huge adoption .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Win7 comes with a 64bit and a 32 bit IE8.
And flash doesn't really work in the 64bit version.
So your 12 month prediction is probably optimistic (the low end of your guess I know).
There are still a large number of significant problems with software while running a 64 bit OS.
I'm sure most of them you can overcome but for people like Dell and HP?
... They will be releasing things in 32bit until they run into physical limitations.
(Which wont be for a bit still on office type machines).
And without the big boys switching over we'll continue to see many problems in the software.
Think IPv6... Its been ... 20years? And there still isn't huge adoption.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511184</id>
	<title>Firefox not quite there yet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261405080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Firefox has made some great gains on IE and is virtually neck to neck with IE, but it hasn't quite passed it yet. The article should have read for the month of December 2009.</p><p>http://techie-buzz.com/firefox/firefox35-not-the-most-used-browser-yet.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firefox has made some great gains on IE and is virtually neck to neck with IE , but it has n't quite passed it yet .
The article should have read for the month of December 2009.http : //techie-buzz.com/firefox/firefox35-not-the-most-used-browser-yet.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firefox has made some great gains on IE and is virtually neck to neck with IE, but it hasn't quite passed it yet.
The article should have read for the month of December 2009.http://techie-buzz.com/firefox/firefox35-not-the-most-used-browser-yet.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512830</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox / Windows 7</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1261415100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Some Googling suggests it's a recent update with Firefox others suggest it's a Firefox / Flash issue.</p></div><p>A userspace application cannot cause a BSOD (kernel panic). This is strictly a driver issue, video most likely. Of course it can be triggered by Firefox/Flash/whatever combo, but the bug is still in the driver.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some Googling suggests it 's a recent update with Firefox others suggest it 's a Firefox / Flash issue.A userspace application can not cause a BSOD ( kernel panic ) .
This is strictly a driver issue , video most likely .
Of course it can be triggered by Firefox/Flash/whatever combo , but the bug is still in the driver .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some Googling suggests it's a recent update with Firefox others suggest it's a Firefox / Flash issue.A userspace application cannot cause a BSOD (kernel panic).
This is strictly a driver issue, video most likely.
Of course it can be triggered by Firefox/Flash/whatever combo, but the bug is still in the driver.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511980</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508704</id>
	<title>Oscillation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261326540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Antarctica graph is intersting...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Antarctica graph is intersting.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Antarctica graph is intersting...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510266</id>
	<title>re</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261392660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great now another 10 years to get people on the much faster Chrome and drop ye slow and a bit bloated FF.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great now another 10 years to get people on the much faster Chrome and drop ye slow and a bit bloated FF .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great now another 10 years to get people on the much faster Chrome and drop ye slow and a bit bloated FF.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508464</id>
	<title>No it isn't (according to that site)!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1261323600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you look at the browsers, independent of the version:<br><a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951" title="statcounter.com">http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951</a> [statcounter.com]<br>you see that IE is clearly far on top.</p><p>BUT, as I previously said, Statcounter does not count anyone with an ad blocker, in browser, in the firewall, etc.<br>Because they are blocked for tracking users across sites with their web beacon.</p><p>So not only are the numbers strongly biased in one direction. No TFS biases them back in the other direction.</p><p>That is, all in all, a truly epic fail. And I&rsquo;m not even a statistics guy. I bet those would first die from the horrors, and then spin in their graves fast enough to power a small city.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you look at the browsers , independent of the version : http : //gs.statcounter.com/ # browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951 [ statcounter.com ] you see that IE is clearly far on top.BUT , as I previously said , Statcounter does not count anyone with an ad blocker , in browser , in the firewall , etc.Because they are blocked for tracking users across sites with their web beacon.So not only are the numbers strongly biased in one direction .
No TFS biases them back in the other direction.That is , all in all , a truly epic fail .
And I    m not even a statistics guy .
I bet those would first die from the horrors , and then spin in their graves fast enough to power a small city .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you look at the browsers, independent of the version:http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951 [statcounter.com]you see that IE is clearly far on top.BUT, as I previously said, Statcounter does not count anyone with an ad blocker, in browser, in the firewall, etc.Because they are blocked for tracking users across sites with their web beacon.So not only are the numbers strongly biased in one direction.
No TFS biases them back in the other direction.That is, all in all, a truly epic fail.
And I’m not even a statistics guy.
I bet those would first die from the horrors, and then spin in their graves fast enough to power a small city.
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508728</id>
	<title>Re:One word: adblock</title>
	<author>krelian</author>
	<datestamp>1261326900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Everyone I know whom I have shown Firefox with Adblock Plus switches and stays with it. The Internet with ads is just horrid (sorry Slashdot!).</p></div><p>What would happen if you succeed and convert all internet users to firefox + adblock?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone I know whom I have shown Firefox with Adblock Plus switches and stays with it .
The Internet with ads is just horrid ( sorry Slashdot !
) .What would happen if you succeed and convert all internet users to firefox + adblock ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone I know whom I have shown Firefox with Adblock Plus switches and stays with it.
The Internet with ads is just horrid (sorry Slashdot!
).What would happen if you succeed and convert all internet users to firefox + adblock?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510458</id>
	<title>Re:Only reason for any IE6 market share</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261395060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, the article says the majority is Korea and China.  In those countries, IE6 is Needed to do every day things, online banking for example.  They don't work with any other browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , the article says the majority is Korea and China .
In those countries , IE6 is Needed to do every day things , online banking for example .
They do n't work with any other browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, the article says the majority is Korea and China.
In those countries, IE6 is Needed to do every day things, online banking for example.
They don't work with any other browser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508148</id>
	<title>Browser down.</title>
	<author>binarylarry</author>
	<datestamp>1261320000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OS next.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OS next .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OS next.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508952</id>
	<title>Re:Why MS failed.</title>
	<author>rtb61</author>
	<datestamp>1261329540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Interesting thing about Firefox though, I can bet that it will never remain the most popular browser but don't expect any real threat from IE what ever version. The biggest threat to Firefox will be other Mozilla browsers, some of which might even be produced by Firefox.com. </p><p> As the underlying open source code for Firefox becomes more popular expect more parallel development, specialised versions for particular uses, branded versions and of course tweaked versions to suit specific online strategies, but all of the basically being compatible in terms of web content connect ability, hmm, the wonderful world of open standards (real competition, greater innovation and better end user relations).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting thing about Firefox though , I can bet that it will never remain the most popular browser but do n't expect any real threat from IE what ever version .
The biggest threat to Firefox will be other Mozilla browsers , some of which might even be produced by Firefox.com .
As the underlying open source code for Firefox becomes more popular expect more parallel development , specialised versions for particular uses , branded versions and of course tweaked versions to suit specific online strategies , but all of the basically being compatible in terms of web content connect ability , hmm , the wonderful world of open standards ( real competition , greater innovation and better end user relations ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Interesting thing about Firefox though, I can bet that it will never remain the most popular browser but don't expect any real threat from IE what ever version.
The biggest threat to Firefox will be other Mozilla browsers, some of which might even be produced by Firefox.com.
As the underlying open source code for Firefox becomes more popular expect more parallel development, specialised versions for particular uses, branded versions and of course tweaked versions to suit specific online strategies, but all of the basically being compatible in terms of web content connect ability, hmm, the wonderful world of open standards (real competition, greater innovation and better end user relations).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512762</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1261414800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, given that Gecko is relatively easy to reuse, I'm surprised no-one had yet made a perfect IE6/7/8 UI clone with Gecko engine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , given that Gecko is relatively easy to reuse , I 'm surprised no-one had yet made a perfect IE6/7/8 UI clone with Gecko engine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, given that Gecko is relatively easy to reuse, I'm surprised no-one had yet made a perfect IE6/7/8 UI clone with Gecko engine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30521938</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>Kotten</author>
	<datestamp>1261479240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Grouping three different browsers together never made sense to me. There is more differences between IE6 and IE8 than between Firefox and Opera. Grouping All firefox together might make sense but not grouping IE.</p><p>Car analogy: Toyota Corolla is the most sold car in the world but there is not much if at all that is reused from the 1966 version in todays car. It is only the name that is the same</p><p>So rejoice that web-developers can tell their PHB's that they are now developing for both the w3c-standard AND the de-facto standard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Grouping three different browsers together never made sense to me .
There is more differences between IE6 and IE8 than between Firefox and Opera .
Grouping All firefox together might make sense but not grouping IE.Car analogy : Toyota Corolla is the most sold car in the world but there is not much if at all that is reused from the 1966 version in todays car .
It is only the name that is the sameSo rejoice that web-developers can tell their PHB 's that they are now developing for both the w3c-standard AND the de-facto standard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Grouping three different browsers together never made sense to me.
There is more differences between IE6 and IE8 than between Firefox and Opera.
Grouping All firefox together might make sense but not grouping IE.Car analogy: Toyota Corolla is the most sold car in the world but there is not much if at all that is reused from the 1966 version in todays car.
It is only the name that is the sameSo rejoice that web-developers can tell their PHB's that they are now developing for both the w3c-standard AND the de-facto standard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510592</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261397040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are talking 36 months in the future then IE9 or even IE10 will be running by that time. IE8 is a huge improvement on IE6 but it's only the second step.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are talking 36 months in the future then IE9 or even IE10 will be running by that time .
IE8 is a huge improvement on IE6 but it 's only the second step .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are talking 36 months in the future then IE9 or even IE10 will be running by that time.
IE8 is a huge improvement on IE6 but it's only the second step.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509366</id>
	<title>Ads ? What ads ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261334460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I never understand these comments - up on the right hand corner of slashdot, there's a colored box with nothing interesting, when I look today, yes, it's an advert. But it's beside TFA, which I never read either, cause I've already scanned that from the front page. I just come down here in the comments for the real goodness. Or am I missing something cause I use Opera?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I never understand these comments - up on the right hand corner of slashdot , there 's a colored box with nothing interesting , when I look today , yes , it 's an advert .
But it 's beside TFA , which I never read either , cause I 've already scanned that from the front page .
I just come down here in the comments for the real goodness .
Or am I missing something cause I use Opera ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never understand these comments - up on the right hand corner of slashdot, there's a colored box with nothing interesting, when I look today, yes, it's an advert.
But it's beside TFA, which I never read either, cause I've already scanned that from the front page.
I just come down here in the comments for the real goodness.
Or am I missing something cause I use Opera?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</id>
	<title>IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261320900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're going to see IE8 be absolutely huge over the next 5 years - even if firefox is preferred by geeks and the somewhat tech savvy.<br>As the huge 32/64bit transition begins (next 12 to 36 months my guess) business's finally can roll out 64bit Windows 7, avoiding Vista entirely and finally retiring Windows XP.<br>This is going to continue to increase IE8 marketshare much like IE6's was boosted from XP, so what we can only hope is that IE8 isn't garbage (me, I don't know? I use Firefox also)</p><p>For what it's worth, I work for one of the state govt's of Australia and one of our departments has just switched from Win2k to XP<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/   so I'm guessing we won't be moving to Windows 7 for at least 2 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're going to see IE8 be absolutely huge over the next 5 years - even if firefox is preferred by geeks and the somewhat tech savvy.As the huge 32/64bit transition begins ( next 12 to 36 months my guess ) business 's finally can roll out 64bit Windows 7 , avoiding Vista entirely and finally retiring Windows XP.This is going to continue to increase IE8 marketshare much like IE6 's was boosted from XP , so what we can only hope is that IE8 is n't garbage ( me , I do n't know ?
I use Firefox also ) For what it 's worth , I work for one of the state govt 's of Australia and one of our departments has just switched from Win2k to XP : / so I 'm guessing we wo n't be moving to Windows 7 for at least 2 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're going to see IE8 be absolutely huge over the next 5 years - even if firefox is preferred by geeks and the somewhat tech savvy.As the huge 32/64bit transition begins (next 12 to 36 months my guess) business's finally can roll out 64bit Windows 7, avoiding Vista entirely and finally retiring Windows XP.This is going to continue to increase IE8 marketshare much like IE6's was boosted from XP, so what we can only hope is that IE8 isn't garbage (me, I don't know?
I use Firefox also)For what it's worth, I work for one of the state govt's of Australia and one of our departments has just switched from Win2k to XP :/   so I'm guessing we won't be moving to Windows 7 for at least 2 years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508972</id>
	<title>Precise Title.</title>
	<author>arose</author>
	<datestamp>1261329660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you completely miss the '3.5', then it's a reading comprehension problem, not a title problem. The wording isn't misleading at all, in fact it's very precise. And it's quite an important stat too, IE is so fragmented that even the laziest developers will find it hard to target it exclusively (as noted IE versions are quite different).</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you completely miss the '3.5 ' , then it 's a reading comprehension problem , not a title problem .
The wording is n't misleading at all , in fact it 's very precise .
And it 's quite an important stat too , IE is so fragmented that even the laziest developers will find it hard to target it exclusively ( as noted IE versions are quite different ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you completely miss the '3.5', then it's a reading comprehension problem, not a title problem.
The wording isn't misleading at all, in fact it's very precise.
And it's quite an important stat too, IE is so fragmented that even the laziest developers will find it hard to target it exclusively (as noted IE versions are quite different).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508640</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>canajin56</author>
	<datestamp>1261325640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, if the trends keep up, soon over 200\% of people will be using Firefox, and IE will be well into the negatives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , if the trends keep up , soon over 200 \ % of people will be using Firefox , and IE will be well into the negatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, if the trends keep up, soon over 200\% of people will be using Firefox, and IE will be well into the negatives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510140</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261390800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wouldn't say most FF users are more tech savvy.  I would say that most FF users know at least one tech savvy person.  Also, I don't think I've blocked StatCounter.  I don't know why I should.</p></div><p>Do you use NoScript in white list mode. Then you have StatCounter blocked. Do you use NoScript in black list mode with the default XSS settings. Then you have StatCounter blocked. Do you use NoScript in black list mode and use a ready-made black list. Then you propably have StatCounter blocked. Do you use any web filtering software with a ready-made black list. Then you propably have StatCounter blocked.</p><p>Only stupid people use Firefox without NoScript or something similar, without it you could as well use Internet Explorer (if you use Windows as your OS). My guess is that most Firefox users use NoScript or something similar that blocks things like StatCounter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't say most FF users are more tech savvy .
I would say that most FF users know at least one tech savvy person .
Also , I do n't think I 've blocked StatCounter .
I do n't know why I should.Do you use NoScript in white list mode .
Then you have StatCounter blocked .
Do you use NoScript in black list mode with the default XSS settings .
Then you have StatCounter blocked .
Do you use NoScript in black list mode and use a ready-made black list .
Then you propably have StatCounter blocked .
Do you use any web filtering software with a ready-made black list .
Then you propably have StatCounter blocked.Only stupid people use Firefox without NoScript or something similar , without it you could as well use Internet Explorer ( if you use Windows as your OS ) .
My guess is that most Firefox users use NoScript or something similar that blocks things like StatCounter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't say most FF users are more tech savvy.
I would say that most FF users know at least one tech savvy person.
Also, I don't think I've blocked StatCounter.
I don't know why I should.Do you use NoScript in white list mode.
Then you have StatCounter blocked.
Do you use NoScript in black list mode with the default XSS settings.
Then you have StatCounter blocked.
Do you use NoScript in black list mode and use a ready-made black list.
Then you propably have StatCounter blocked.
Do you use any web filtering software with a ready-made black list.
Then you propably have StatCounter blocked.Only stupid people use Firefox without NoScript or something similar, without it you could as well use Internet Explorer (if you use Windows as your OS).
My guess is that most Firefox users use NoScript or something similar that blocks things like StatCounter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508598</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading Title.</title>
	<author>zill</author>
	<datestamp>1261325160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That really depends on how you define "browser".

Most slashdotter differentiate browsers by their codebase because we're software oriented and are more concerned about the standard compliance of each browser as opposed to whatever arbitrary string the marketing departments assigns.<br> <br>

If you choose to use the marketing name to differentiate browsers, then please consider the following senario:<p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft buys out Opera with $500 million (37\% premium) and renames Opera to IE8 SP0.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That really depends on how you define " browser " .
Most slashdotter differentiate browsers by their codebase because we 're software oriented and are more concerned about the standard compliance of each browser as opposed to whatever arbitrary string the marketing departments assigns .
If you choose to use the marketing name to differentiate browsers , then please consider the following senario : Microsoft buys out Opera with $ 500 million ( 37 \ % premium ) and renames Opera to IE8 SP0 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That really depends on how you define "browser".
Most slashdotter differentiate browsers by their codebase because we're software oriented and are more concerned about the standard compliance of each browser as opposed to whatever arbitrary string the marketing departments assigns.
If you choose to use the marketing name to differentiate browsers, then please consider the following senario:Microsoft buys out Opera with $500 million (37\% premium) and renames Opera to IE8 SP0.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509286</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Solandri</author>
	<datestamp>1261333380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For Internet Explorer, only IE8 is still growing, but its rate of growth is significantly slower than Firefox's. The headline may be misleading, but the the summary is right on the money. If these trends keep up, the headline may well become true a lot sooner than you seem to think.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I disagree.  The plots for IE7 and IE8 are nearly inverses of each other, indicating it's mostly IE7 users switching to IE8.  Same goes for FF3.0 and FF3.5 - most FF3.5 users are coming from FF3.0.  But the two lines for FF3.0 and FF3.5 have already crossed (most FF3.0 users have already switched to 3.5).  On the other hand, the two lines for IE have not crossed yet (most IE7 users have yet to switch).  So while FF3.5 may have a faster rate of adoption right now, it should taper off sooner than IE8 adoption does.  And IE8 will pass it again.
<br> <br>
Of course really long term I'm hoping to see IE8 users switching to FF3.5.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For Internet Explorer , only IE8 is still growing , but its rate of growth is significantly slower than Firefox 's .
The headline may be misleading , but the the summary is right on the money .
If these trends keep up , the headline may well become true a lot sooner than you seem to think .
I disagree .
The plots for IE7 and IE8 are nearly inverses of each other , indicating it 's mostly IE7 users switching to IE8 .
Same goes for FF3.0 and FF3.5 - most FF3.5 users are coming from FF3.0 .
But the two lines for FF3.0 and FF3.5 have already crossed ( most FF3.0 users have already switched to 3.5 ) .
On the other hand , the two lines for IE have not crossed yet ( most IE7 users have yet to switch ) .
So while FF3.5 may have a faster rate of adoption right now , it should taper off sooner than IE8 adoption does .
And IE8 will pass it again .
Of course really long term I 'm hoping to see IE8 users switching to FF3.5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For Internet Explorer, only IE8 is still growing, but its rate of growth is significantly slower than Firefox's.
The headline may be misleading, but the the summary is right on the money.
If these trends keep up, the headline may well become true a lot sooner than you seem to think.
I disagree.
The plots for IE7 and IE8 are nearly inverses of each other, indicating it's mostly IE7 users switching to IE8.
Same goes for FF3.0 and FF3.5 - most FF3.5 users are coming from FF3.0.
But the two lines for FF3.0 and FF3.5 have already crossed (most FF3.0 users have already switched to 3.5).
On the other hand, the two lines for IE have not crossed yet (most IE7 users have yet to switch).
So while FF3.5 may have a faster rate of adoption right now, it should taper off sooner than IE8 adoption does.
And IE8 will pass it again.
Of course really long term I'm hoping to see IE8 users switching to FF3.5.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30514894</id>
	<title>Re:Why MS failed.</title>
	<author>rraylion</author>
	<datestamp>1261423980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>lets be honest the reason firefox has taken off in the last six months has nothing to do with IE or the problems IE has.

THREE WORDS:  MAFIA WARS AUTOPLAYER

the reason 500k people have downloaded and installed firefox is because the script MWAP can run in greasemonkey and play a video game for you.

sad but true.  Firefox/icedove -- thank ZYNGA for your market share</htmltext>
<tokenext>lets be honest the reason firefox has taken off in the last six months has nothing to do with IE or the problems IE has .
THREE WORDS : MAFIA WARS AUTOPLAYER the reason 500k people have downloaded and installed firefox is because the script MWAP can run in greasemonkey and play a video game for you .
sad but true .
Firefox/icedove -- thank ZYNGA for your market share</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lets be honest the reason firefox has taken off in the last six months has nothing to do with IE or the problems IE has.
THREE WORDS:  MAFIA WARS AUTOPLAYER

the reason 500k people have downloaded and installed firefox is because the script MWAP can run in greasemonkey and play a video game for you.
sad but true.
Firefox/icedove -- thank ZYNGA for your market share</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508230</id>
	<title>Wrote this using FF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261321020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>55\% to 22\% but gaining a little is the real story.  When you mark me as troll be sure to note I wrote this on FF.  Actually I use nothing but FF and encourage my users to do the same.  Nevertheless this story is a little misleading in suggesting that FF is winning against IE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>55 \ % to 22 \ % but gaining a little is the real story .
When you mark me as troll be sure to note I wrote this on FF .
Actually I use nothing but FF and encourage my users to do the same .
Nevertheless this story is a little misleading in suggesting that FF is winning against IE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>55\% to 22\% but gaining a little is the real story.
When you mark me as troll be sure to note I wrote this on FF.
Actually I use nothing but FF and encourage my users to do the same.
Nevertheless this story is a little misleading in suggesting that FF is winning against IE.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511326</id>
	<title>Re:Browser down.</title>
	<author>Sleepy</author>
	<datestamp>1261406220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Browser down.<br>&gt;OS next.</p><p>Whaddya mean... the browser's NOT part of the OS? That's unpossible!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Browser down. &gt; OS next.Whaddya mean... the browser 's NOT part of the OS ?
That 's unpossible !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Browser down.&gt;OS next.Whaddya mean... the browser's NOT part of the OS?
That's unpossible!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508756</id>
	<title>Who is using IE6:</title>
	<author>7-Vodka</author>
	<datestamp>1261327200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work for a large company with 130k employees and EVERYBODY uses IE6 because it's what the IT department mandates. To get an exception to this you have to go through so much hassle and have a business provable reason for the request.
</p><p>
I wish I could use a better browser, IE6 really sucks in many many ways. It's slooww, has memory leaks like you wouldn't believe and doesn't even render slashdot correctly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a large company with 130k employees and EVERYBODY uses IE6 because it 's what the IT department mandates .
To get an exception to this you have to go through so much hassle and have a business provable reason for the request .
I wish I could use a better browser , IE6 really sucks in many many ways .
It 's slooww , has memory leaks like you would n't believe and does n't even render slashdot correctly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a large company with 130k employees and EVERYBODY uses IE6 because it's what the IT department mandates.
To get an exception to this you have to go through so much hassle and have a business provable reason for the request.
I wish I could use a better browser, IE6 really sucks in many many ways.
It's slooww, has memory leaks like you wouldn't believe and doesn't even render slashdot correctly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254</id>
	<title>One word: adblock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261321260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Everyone I know whom I have shown Firefox with Adblock Plus switches and stays with it. The Internet with ads is just horrid (sorry Slashdot!).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone I know whom I have shown Firefox with Adblock Plus switches and stays with it .
The Internet with ads is just horrid ( sorry Slashdot !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone I know whom I have shown Firefox with Adblock Plus switches and stays with it.
The Internet with ads is just horrid (sorry Slashdot!
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508848</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261328640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I did just exactly this a few weeks ago. Non-technical friend was pleased with result. He was even more pleased a few days ago when I replaced his entire Vista desktop with KDE (kubuntu 9.10).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did just exactly this a few weeks ago .
Non-technical friend was pleased with result .
He was even more pleased a few days ago when I replaced his entire Vista desktop with KDE ( kubuntu 9.10 ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did just exactly this a few weeks ago.
Non-technical friend was pleased with result.
He was even more pleased a few days ago when I replaced his entire Vista desktop with KDE (kubuntu 9.10).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508446</id>
	<title>Ding! Dong! The Witch is Dead!</title>
	<author>yuda</author>
	<datestamp>1261323480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just had a look at the stats for New Zealand (where I come from) IE 6 accounts for now only around 9\% of the browser market. Now if I could get a certain clients head around that fact and that he should upgrade his browser to something that isn't quite so shit, then maybe both of us could get some sleep</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just had a look at the stats for New Zealand ( where I come from ) IE 6 accounts for now only around 9 \ % of the browser market .
Now if I could get a certain clients head around that fact and that he should upgrade his browser to something that is n't quite so shit , then maybe both of us could get some sleep</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just had a look at the stats for New Zealand (where I come from) IE 6 accounts for now only around 9\% of the browser market.
Now if I could get a certain clients head around that fact and that he should upgrade his browser to something that isn't quite so shit, then maybe both of us could get some sleep</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1261328460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I fail to see all good news for Firefox on that page.  Or, should I say that I don't see all good news for consumers.</p><p>Together, IE6, IE7 and IE8 still dominate the market.  I'm afraid that will remain true for a couple more years, no matter how much pressure the rest of the world puts on the market.  Separating the versions of the various browsers just clutters the picture.</p><p>If I may, I'll point out that I'm partly color blind.  It's tough to see that chart.  It's hard to see the "real picture".  What is literally true for me, is figuratively true for those who are working so hard to track browser usage.</p><p>Is there a page that tracks usage, which lumps IE (all versions), Firefox (all versions) Opera (all versions) etc?</p><p>Ahhhhh, here we go:  <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951" title="statcounter.com">http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951</a> [statcounter.com]</p><p>Yes indeed.  Global domination by Firefox is indeed getting closer - but not this year, and probably not next  year.  Let's give it between 3 and 5 years, alright?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fail to see all good news for Firefox on that page .
Or , should I say that I do n't see all good news for consumers.Together , IE6 , IE7 and IE8 still dominate the market .
I 'm afraid that will remain true for a couple more years , no matter how much pressure the rest of the world puts on the market .
Separating the versions of the various browsers just clutters the picture.If I may , I 'll point out that I 'm partly color blind .
It 's tough to see that chart .
It 's hard to see the " real picture " .
What is literally true for me , is figuratively true for those who are working so hard to track browser usage.Is there a page that tracks usage , which lumps IE ( all versions ) , Firefox ( all versions ) Opera ( all versions ) etc ? Ahhhhh , here we go : http : //gs.statcounter.com/ # browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951 [ statcounter.com ] Yes indeed .
Global domination by Firefox is indeed getting closer - but not this year , and probably not next year .
Let 's give it between 3 and 5 years , alright ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fail to see all good news for Firefox on that page.
Or, should I say that I don't see all good news for consumers.Together, IE6, IE7 and IE8 still dominate the market.
I'm afraid that will remain true for a couple more years, no matter how much pressure the rest of the world puts on the market.
Separating the versions of the various browsers just clutters the picture.If I may, I'll point out that I'm partly color blind.
It's tough to see that chart.
It's hard to see the "real picture".
What is literally true for me, is figuratively true for those who are working so hard to track browser usage.Is there a page that tracks usage, which lumps IE (all versions), Firefox (all versions) Opera (all versions) etc?Ahhhhh, here we go:  http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-weekly-200827-200951 [statcounter.com]Yes indeed.
Global domination by Firefox is indeed getting closer - but not this year, and probably not next  year.
Let's give it between 3 and 5 years, alright?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508378</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261322760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you believe that IE6, IE7 and IE8 are somehow the same browser then you should immediately start learning how to use a computer. You are talking about the <b>brand</b>, not the software. And obviously the brand doesn't mean jack shit if your branded browser can't open regular web pages without artifacts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you believe that IE6 , IE7 and IE8 are somehow the same browser then you should immediately start learning how to use a computer .
You are talking about the brand , not the software .
And obviously the brand does n't mean jack shit if your branded browser ca n't open regular web pages without artifacts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you believe that IE6, IE7 and IE8 are somehow the same browser then you should immediately start learning how to use a computer.
You are talking about the brand, not the software.
And obviously the brand doesn't mean jack shit if your branded browser can't open regular web pages without artifacts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508364</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261322640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you saying that over half of the web browser users are more tech savvy than average?  You might want to rethink that statement in the future.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you saying that over half of the web browser users are more tech savvy than average ?
You might want to rethink that statement in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you saying that over half of the web browser users are more tech savvy than average?
You might want to rethink that statement in the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512060</id>
	<title>Not seeing the same stats</title>
	<author>Bobberly</author>
	<datestamp>1261410840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>IE still makes up 86\% of the traffic to sites I control.  Firefox just now hit the 10\% mark, Safari ranks 3rd at 2.6\%.  This time last year IE was 89\%.  Chrome barely makes our charts at 0.5\%.  Dominant browser? Hardly.


I still have 20\% of my users running W2k Pro with IE6.  I've had to fudge user agents on our proxy because of the warnings so many sites give them.  They can't control what machines we give them, and we can't upgrade their hardware because of goverment mandated tax and budget cuts (we are a govermnent office).  Running Firefox is impossible due to lack of enterprise support.

Call me a m$ fanboi, I still see no benefits of running an alternative browser.  Adblock you say?  The proxy does the same thing only better.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IE still makes up 86 \ % of the traffic to sites I control .
Firefox just now hit the 10 \ % mark , Safari ranks 3rd at 2.6 \ % .
This time last year IE was 89 \ % .
Chrome barely makes our charts at 0.5 \ % .
Dominant browser ?
Hardly . I still have 20 \ % of my users running W2k Pro with IE6 .
I 've had to fudge user agents on our proxy because of the warnings so many sites give them .
They ca n't control what machines we give them , and we ca n't upgrade their hardware because of goverment mandated tax and budget cuts ( we are a govermnent office ) .
Running Firefox is impossible due to lack of enterprise support .
Call me a m $ fanboi , I still see no benefits of running an alternative browser .
Adblock you say ?
The proxy does the same thing only better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE still makes up 86\% of the traffic to sites I control.
Firefox just now hit the 10\% mark, Safari ranks 3rd at 2.6\%.
This time last year IE was 89\%.
Chrome barely makes our charts at 0.5\%.
Dominant browser?
Hardly.


I still have 20\% of my users running W2k Pro with IE6.
I've had to fudge user agents on our proxy because of the warnings so many sites give them.
They can't control what machines we give them, and we can't upgrade their hardware because of goverment mandated tax and budget cuts (we are a govermnent office).
Running Firefox is impossible due to lack of enterprise support.
Call me a m$ fanboi, I still see no benefits of running an alternative browser.
Adblock you say?
The proxy does the same thing only better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512006</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261410540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's called AdBlockPlus. Let's you block specific stuff from specific domains. For instance, that's how you can use the Google Analytics see how other ppl have been using a website, but not be tracked by Google when you yourself visit other sites. All from the same browser. Look mom, no tin hat!</p><p>FF rocks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's called AdBlockPlus .
Let 's you block specific stuff from specific domains .
For instance , that 's how you can use the Google Analytics see how other ppl have been using a website , but not be tracked by Google when you yourself visit other sites .
All from the same browser .
Look mom , no tin hat ! FF rocks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's called AdBlockPlus.
Let's you block specific stuff from specific domains.
For instance, that's how you can use the Google Analytics see how other ppl have been using a website, but not be tracked by Google when you yourself visit other sites.
All from the same browser.
Look mom, no tin hat!FF rocks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508306</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>welcher</author>
	<datestamp>1261321800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>that is the ugliest plot i have seen in a long, long time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>that is the ugliest plot i have seen in a long , long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that is the ugliest plot i have seen in a long, long time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509334</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>fluffy99</author>
	<datestamp>1261333980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So when did you go back and install Windows so he could play his favorite games again?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So when did you go back and install Windows so he could play his favorite games again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So when did you go back and install Windows so he could play his favorite games again?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30518724</id>
	<title>Re:Only reason for any IE6 market share</title>
	<author>toddestan</author>
	<datestamp>1261402380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd say you're rather ignorant yourself.  Not everyone installed their warezed copies of Windows yesterday. I even know of at least one computer out there still running the infamous FCKGW key, which is blacklisted from even installing XP SP1.  And lots of people still running V2C47 which no longer update (for fear of the dreaded WGA) and are thus stuck somewhere in SP2.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say you 're rather ignorant yourself .
Not everyone installed their warezed copies of Windows yesterday .
I even know of at least one computer out there still running the infamous FCKGW key , which is blacklisted from even installing XP SP1 .
And lots of people still running V2C47 which no longer update ( for fear of the dreaded WGA ) and are thus stuck somewhere in SP2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say you're rather ignorant yourself.
Not everyone installed their warezed copies of Windows yesterday.
I even know of at least one computer out there still running the infamous FCKGW key, which is blacklisted from even installing XP SP1.
And lots of people still running V2C47 which no longer update (for fear of the dreaded WGA) and are thus stuck somewhere in SP2.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512208</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261411800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Total marketshare isn't the most interesting metric, the rate of change is.</i></p><p>If I write a very basic browser today, it will have gone form zero users to one user.</p><p>That's infinite growth! It's obviously the best!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Total marketshare is n't the most interesting metric , the rate of change is.If I write a very basic browser today , it will have gone form zero users to one user.That 's infinite growth !
It 's obviously the best !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Total marketshare isn't the most interesting metric, the rate of change is.If I write a very basic browser today, it will have gone form zero users to one user.That's infinite growth!
It's obviously the best!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517082</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 isn't being held up by choice</title>
	<author>lamapper</author>
	<datestamp>1261391280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't know a single home user on any OS that is using IE6. My incredibly behind-the-times relatives on Windows 2000 are using Firefox, and any of my XP or newer friends and colleagues are using Firefox or a newer flavor of IE (or even Chrome). No, the thing holding up IE6 is corporate America. My company has 70 large locations in America, and probably twice that around the glob, together running about 60,000 computers. Only one (very tiny) division of our company is allowed to run anything other than IE6, and that's because they are a Windows Vista technical support group. The rest of us are forced to use IE6 because most of our applications have been replaced by browser-based 'solutions' like Siebel CRM and the like, using ActiveX and most of which aren't officially supported on newer browsers. It's painful.</p></div><p>So the problem is some dev head developed in Active X and now you are stuck with IE. 6.  I hate IE 6, but you need to blame the development weenies that stupidly used Active X.  There is a reason that many people did not use what was "easiest" and start using Active X.  Same is true for Adobe Flash....hello!  Its easier, not better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know a single home user on any OS that is using IE6 .
My incredibly behind-the-times relatives on Windows 2000 are using Firefox , and any of my XP or newer friends and colleagues are using Firefox or a newer flavor of IE ( or even Chrome ) .
No , the thing holding up IE6 is corporate America .
My company has 70 large locations in America , and probably twice that around the glob , together running about 60,000 computers .
Only one ( very tiny ) division of our company is allowed to run anything other than IE6 , and that 's because they are a Windows Vista technical support group .
The rest of us are forced to use IE6 because most of our applications have been replaced by browser-based 'solutions ' like Siebel CRM and the like , using ActiveX and most of which are n't officially supported on newer browsers .
It 's painful.So the problem is some dev head developed in Active X and now you are stuck with IE .
6. I hate IE 6 , but you need to blame the development weenies that stupidly used Active X. There is a reason that many people did not use what was " easiest " and start using Active X. Same is true for Adobe Flash....hello !
Its easier , not better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know a single home user on any OS that is using IE6.
My incredibly behind-the-times relatives on Windows 2000 are using Firefox, and any of my XP or newer friends and colleagues are using Firefox or a newer flavor of IE (or even Chrome).
No, the thing holding up IE6 is corporate America.
My company has 70 large locations in America, and probably twice that around the glob, together running about 60,000 computers.
Only one (very tiny) division of our company is allowed to run anything other than IE6, and that's because they are a Windows Vista technical support group.
The rest of us are forced to use IE6 because most of our applications have been replaced by browser-based 'solutions' like Siebel CRM and the like, using ActiveX and most of which aren't officially supported on newer browsers.
It's painful.So the problem is some dev head developed in Active X and now you are stuck with IE.
6.  I hate IE 6, but you need to blame the development weenies that stupidly used Active X.  There is a reason that many people did not use what was "easiest" and start using Active X.  Same is true for Adobe Flash....hello!
Its easier, not better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511734</id>
	<title>Re:Who is using IE6:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261409040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just run Firefox Portable from your home directory or usb stick...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just run Firefox Portable from your home directory or usb stick.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just run Firefox Portable from your home directory or usb stick...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509012</id>
	<title>Re:so....?</title>
	<author>reub2000</author>
	<datestamp>1261330020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've mostly switched to Konqueror for most of my browsing. I only use Firefox for gmail and google docs. I've used firefox since firebird 0.7.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've mostly switched to Konqueror for most of my browsing .
I only use Firefox for gmail and google docs .
I 've used firefox since firebird 0.7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've mostly switched to Konqueror for most of my browsing.
I only use Firefox for gmail and google docs.
I've used firefox since firebird 0.7.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508714</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>EricX2</author>
	<datestamp>1261326780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Works great. My family also get adblock and flashblock... they have no idea that the internet still has ads and have never been annoyed by a flash animation fly over their screens.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Works great .
My family also get adblock and flashblock... they have no idea that the internet still has ads and have never been annoyed by a flash animation fly over their screens .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Works great.
My family also get adblock and flashblock... they have no idea that the internet still has ads and have never been annoyed by a flash animation fly over their screens.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510832</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261400280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Blocking *statcounter* in Adblock is real hard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blocking * statcounter * in Adblock is real hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blocking *statcounter* in Adblock is real hard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510686</id>
	<title>Re:Pretty deceiving</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261398360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows. Fucking. Update.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows .
Fucking. Update .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows.
Fucking. Update.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508312</id>
	<title>A shame, 3.6 is very quick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261321860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Firefox 3.5 is a very slow piece of shit, reminds me of old Internet Explorer versions. I am using Firefox 3.6 Beta6 and it is so much faster! I hope most of these Firefox 3.5 people upgrade to 3.6 ASAP when it is released.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Firefox 3.5 is a very slow piece of shit , reminds me of old Internet Explorer versions .
I am using Firefox 3.6 Beta6 and it is so much faster !
I hope most of these Firefox 3.5 people upgrade to 3.6 ASAP when it is released .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firefox 3.5 is a very slow piece of shit, reminds me of old Internet Explorer versions.
I am using Firefox 3.6 Beta6 and it is so much faster!
I hope most of these Firefox 3.5 people upgrade to 3.6 ASAP when it is released.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508158</id>
	<title>From The Book of Mozilla, 11:9</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261320180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mammon slept. And the beast reborn spread over the earth and its numbers grew legion. And they proclaimed the times and sacrificed crops unto the fire, with the cunning of foxes. And they built a new world in their own image as promised by the sacred words, and spoke of the beast with their children. Mammon awoke, and lo! it was naught but a follower.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mammon slept .
And the beast reborn spread over the earth and its numbers grew legion .
And they proclaimed the times and sacrificed crops unto the fire , with the cunning of foxes .
And they built a new world in their own image as promised by the sacred words , and spoke of the beast with their children .
Mammon awoke , and lo !
it was naught but a follower .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mammon slept.
And the beast reborn spread over the earth and its numbers grew legion.
And they proclaimed the times and sacrificed crops unto the fire, with the cunning of foxes.
And they built a new world in their own image as promised by the sacred words, and spoke of the beast with their children.
Mammon awoke, and lo!
it was naught but a follower.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512956</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>Mutant321</author>
	<datestamp>1261415580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given what those stats looked like at the beginning of the decade, it's still a staggering achievement. An OSS project has taken a huge chunk of MS's market share in an important strategic marketplace. And that's with the huge advantage MS gets with bundling.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given what those stats looked like at the beginning of the decade , it 's still a staggering achievement .
An OSS project has taken a huge chunk of MS 's market share in an important strategic marketplace .
And that 's with the huge advantage MS gets with bundling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given what those stats looked like at the beginning of the decade, it's still a staggering achievement.
An OSS project has taken a huge chunk of MS's market share in an important strategic marketplace.
And that's with the huge advantage MS gets with bundling.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509362</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261334340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Corporate Intranets with no budget for upgrades are what keeps IE6 alive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporate Intranets with no budget for upgrades are what keeps IE6 alive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporate Intranets with no budget for upgrades are what keeps IE6 alive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510464</id>
	<title>Re:One word: adblock</title>
	<author>WGFCrafty</author>
	<datestamp>1261395180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I disabled AdBlock on slashdot.org and clicked the 'disable ads' button just so that thing would go away.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I disabled AdBlock on slashdot.org and clicked the 'disable ads ' button just so that thing would go away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disabled AdBlock on slashdot.org and clicked the 'disable ads' button just so that thing would go away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508516</id>
	<title>What happened to Netcraft confirming it?</title>
	<author>indigoid</author>
	<datestamp>1261324200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>:-(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>: - (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>:-(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509042</id>
	<title>Re:IE6 comes with XP, IE8 with Win7</title>
	<author>Americium</author>
	<datestamp>1261330260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>so what we can only hope is that IE8 isn't garbage</p> </div><p>When I installed Win7 RC (I need windows for my excel programs, ms basic for apps..... and for left4dead2), nothing has ever crashed, EXCEPT IE8. I only opened it twice. First, to attempt to download Firefox, but it crashed. Second, to download Firefox, and it worked, then I immediately closed it and deleted all icons for it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>so what we can only hope is that IE8 is n't garbage When I installed Win7 RC ( I need windows for my excel programs , ms basic for apps..... and for left4dead2 ) , nothing has ever crashed , EXCEPT IE8 .
I only opened it twice .
First , to attempt to download Firefox , but it crashed .
Second , to download Firefox , and it worked , then I immediately closed it and deleted all icons for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so what we can only hope is that IE8 isn't garbage When I installed Win7 RC (I need windows for my excel programs, ms basic for apps..... and for left4dead2), nothing has ever crashed, EXCEPT IE8.
I only opened it twice.
First, to attempt to download Firefox, but it crashed.
Second, to download Firefox, and it worked, then I immediately closed it and deleted all icons for it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510638</id>
	<title>Re:StatCounter?</title>
	<author>knarf</author>
	<datestamp>1261397640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't need to block <i>all external images</i> to get rid of this type of tracking. Blocking 1x1 web bugs is sufficient. Another way of getting rid of this type of tracking is by pointing statcounter (et al) to 0.0.0.0 on your DNS proxy or in the hosts file. No tin foil hat needed at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need to block all external images to get rid of this type of tracking .
Blocking 1x1 web bugs is sufficient .
Another way of getting rid of this type of tracking is by pointing statcounter ( et al ) to 0.0.0.0 on your DNS proxy or in the hosts file .
No tin foil hat needed at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need to block all external images to get rid of this type of tracking.
Blocking 1x1 web bugs is sufficient.
Another way of getting rid of this type of tracking is by pointing statcounter (et al) to 0.0.0.0 on your DNS proxy or in the hosts file.
No tin foil hat needed at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30535168</id>
	<title>Mot in my neighborhood.</title>
	<author>sglines</author>
	<datestamp>1259769420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I took a quick look at the last 500 records in a weblog I manage.  Firefox was way down on the list. At the top was MSIE 7.0 with 130 hits followed by MSIE 8 with 88. Firefox 3.01 had 71 hits, Chrom<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.02 had 54, Safari 4.03 had 39 hits followed, finally by Firefox 3.5.5 with 36 hits. Sorry I look at real data not someones wish-list.</p><p>SG</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I took a quick look at the last 500 records in a weblog I manage .
Firefox was way down on the list .
At the top was MSIE 7.0 with 130 hits followed by MSIE 8 with 88 .
Firefox 3.01 had 71 hits , Chrom .02 had 54 , Safari 4.03 had 39 hits followed , finally by Firefox 3.5.5 with 36 hits .
Sorry I look at real data not someones wish-list.SG</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I took a quick look at the last 500 records in a weblog I manage.
Firefox was way down on the list.
At the top was MSIE 7.0 with 130 hits followed by MSIE 8 with 88.
Firefox 3.01 had 71 hits, Chrom .02 had 54, Safari 4.03 had 39 hits followed, finally by Firefox 3.5.5 with 36 hits.
Sorry I look at real data not someones wish-list.SG</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508436</id>
	<title>Re:My plan worked</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261323300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you can change the icons and the theme they will really never know the difference.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can change the icons and the theme they will really never know the difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can change the icons and the theme they will really never know the difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509302</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>rainmaestro</author>
	<datestamp>1261333560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You'd be surprised at how slowly some companies change.</p><p>I recently had to deal with a support issue involving a certain Fortune 500 company that some of our employees collaborate with. They were having trouble chatting with the other company's employees. Do they use Office Communicator? Live Meeting? GoToMeeting? Any of a thousand other modern meeting clients? No, the Fortune 500 company still uses NETMEETING.</p><p>Hell, our old website (currently being redesigned) included scripting to bypass a bug in NN 4.X. That browser was dead 6 years ago, and the site was only 4 years old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd be surprised at how slowly some companies change.I recently had to deal with a support issue involving a certain Fortune 500 company that some of our employees collaborate with .
They were having trouble chatting with the other company 's employees .
Do they use Office Communicator ?
Live Meeting ?
GoToMeeting ? Any of a thousand other modern meeting clients ?
No , the Fortune 500 company still uses NETMEETING.Hell , our old website ( currently being redesigned ) included scripting to bypass a bug in NN 4.X .
That browser was dead 6 years ago , and the site was only 4 years old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd be surprised at how slowly some companies change.I recently had to deal with a support issue involving a certain Fortune 500 company that some of our employees collaborate with.
They were having trouble chatting with the other company's employees.
Do they use Office Communicator?
Live Meeting?
GoToMeeting? Any of a thousand other modern meeting clients?
No, the Fortune 500 company still uses NETMEETING.Hell, our old website (currently being redesigned) included scripting to bypass a bug in NN 4.X.
That browser was dead 6 years ago, and the site was only 4 years old.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510210</id>
	<title>What if we narrow the search region?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261392060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look at the stats for <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser\_version-an-monthly-200807-200912" title="statcounter.com" rel="nofollow">Antarctica</a> [statcounter.com]</p><p>Firefox 3.0 clearly in the lead and just a complete mash of the other contenters...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at the stats for Antarctica [ statcounter.com ] Firefox 3.0 clearly in the lead and just a complete mash of the other contenters.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at the stats for Antarctica [statcounter.com]Firefox 3.0 clearly in the lead and just a complete mash of the other contenters...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509396</id>
	<title>Re:Given the instant speed difference alone</title>
	<author>A12m0v</author>
	<datestamp>1261334940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Baby steps.<br>It wasn't so long ago when IE had +90\% of the worldwide browser usage share. I would have had nothing against IE, if it weren't for its incompatible implementation of web standards and being Windows-only. I believe it is a crime to limit a web site access to users of a certain browser and a certain OS. Probably this is what Microsoft wanted all along, to make the WWW an extension of Windows. I experienced this first hand when some sites, like my bank, were IE-only. Luckily, for me, <a href="http://www.winehq.org/" title="winehq.org">Wine</a> [winehq.org] helped a lot in breaking that barrier. This is less of an issue now, IE8 is better with standards, and the usage share of alternative browsers grew to a point that they can't be ignored.<br>Also the <a href="http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/1941&amp;format=HTML&amp;aged=0&amp;language=EN" title="europa.eu">EU's latest legislation</a> [europa.eu] should help level the playing field. I especially like the interoperability bit, and I hope it extends to ensuring IE complies with standards and doesn't introduce proprietary extensions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Baby steps.It was n't so long ago when IE had + 90 \ % of the worldwide browser usage share .
I would have had nothing against IE , if it were n't for its incompatible implementation of web standards and being Windows-only .
I believe it is a crime to limit a web site access to users of a certain browser and a certain OS .
Probably this is what Microsoft wanted all along , to make the WWW an extension of Windows .
I experienced this first hand when some sites , like my bank , were IE-only .
Luckily , for me , Wine [ winehq.org ] helped a lot in breaking that barrier .
This is less of an issue now , IE8 is better with standards , and the usage share of alternative browsers grew to a point that they ca n't be ignored.Also the EU 's latest legislation [ europa.eu ] should help level the playing field .
I especially like the interoperability bit , and I hope it extends to ensuring IE complies with standards and does n't introduce proprietary extensions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Baby steps.It wasn't so long ago when IE had +90\% of the worldwide browser usage share.
I would have had nothing against IE, if it weren't for its incompatible implementation of web standards and being Windows-only.
I believe it is a crime to limit a web site access to users of a certain browser and a certain OS.
Probably this is what Microsoft wanted all along, to make the WWW an extension of Windows.
I experienced this first hand when some sites, like my bank, were IE-only.
Luckily, for me, Wine [winehq.org] helped a lot in breaking that barrier.
This is less of an issue now, IE8 is better with standards, and the usage share of alternative browsers grew to a point that they can't be ignored.Also the EU's latest legislation [europa.eu] should help level the playing field.
I especially like the interoperability bit, and I hope it extends to ensuring IE complies with standards and doesn't introduce proprietary extensions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508208</id>
	<title>Re:IE6? Really?</title>
	<author>mikael\_j</author>
	<datestamp>1261320780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, checking Google Analytics for one of our websites at work has consistently shown IE6 at "just cranks and a handful of corporate users" levels for a long time now (less than 10\%, down to about 5\% last month or so). You'll never get rid of it completely, there are still a few nutjobs running Mac OS 9 + IE5 out there, unfortunately a lot of these people will complain loudly when things don't work for them (even though there is no chance whatsoever of most websites supporting their ancient setup).</p><p>/Mikael</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , checking Google Analytics for one of our websites at work has consistently shown IE6 at " just cranks and a handful of corporate users " levels for a long time now ( less than 10 \ % , down to about 5 \ % last month or so ) .
You 'll never get rid of it completely , there are still a few nutjobs running Mac OS 9 + IE5 out there , unfortunately a lot of these people will complain loudly when things do n't work for them ( even though there is no chance whatsoever of most websites supporting their ancient setup ) ./Mikael</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, checking Google Analytics for one of our websites at work has consistently shown IE6 at "just cranks and a handful of corporate users" levels for a long time now (less than 10\%, down to about 5\% last month or so).
You'll never get rid of it completely, there are still a few nutjobs running Mac OS 9 + IE5 out there, unfortunately a lot of these people will complain loudly when things don't work for them (even though there is no chance whatsoever of most websites supporting their ancient setup)./Mikael</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508536</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting way to summarize the data ...</title>
	<author>realityimpaired</author>
	<datestamp>1261324380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if you look at the graph, you can answer that question quite easily...</p><p>Both IE6 and IE7 are in decline. While there's still nutters using IE5 and earlier, those browsers are all listed under "other" which is also in decline. IE8 is the only IE  browser with an increasing market share at this time. And judging from the slopes, most of the new IE8 users are old IE6 and IE7 users... IE7's decline has been very sharp, easily the same slope as IE8's rise.</p><p>So yes, FF3.5 is gaining users and FF's proportional market share is increasing while IE's is decreasing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if you look at the graph , you can answer that question quite easily...Both IE6 and IE7 are in decline .
While there 's still nutters using IE5 and earlier , those browsers are all listed under " other " which is also in decline .
IE8 is the only IE browser with an increasing market share at this time .
And judging from the slopes , most of the new IE8 users are old IE6 and IE7 users... IE7 's decline has been very sharp , easily the same slope as IE8 's rise.So yes , FF3.5 is gaining users and FF 's proportional market share is increasing while IE 's is decreasing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if you look at the graph, you can answer that question quite easily...Both IE6 and IE7 are in decline.
While there's still nutters using IE5 and earlier, those browsers are all listed under "other" which is also in decline.
IE8 is the only IE  browser with an increasing market share at this time.
And judging from the slopes, most of the new IE8 users are old IE6 and IE7 users... IE7's decline has been very sharp, easily the same slope as IE8's rise.So yes, FF3.5 is gaining users and FF's proportional market share is increasing while IE's is decreasing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508428</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30520438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512718
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30519864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30526090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30514754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30521938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508728
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30522032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30518836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511520
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510464
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30523202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30514894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509394
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30521740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30518724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513026
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_2048235_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508282
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510686
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509012
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508208
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510600
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512940
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508308
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509434
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508796
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509362
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511570
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509398
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508710
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509400
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508882
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510646
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508654
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508446
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508830
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511208
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512218
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509396
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512760
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30514754
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511612
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30521938
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509202
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510170
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512848
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30520438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509948
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30518724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513190
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508136
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517082
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508972
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509820
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508464
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512830
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508728
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508332
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510202
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509366
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510494
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510464
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510034
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517414
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508274
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30522032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508436
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512924
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508848
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509334
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509910
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30523202
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30514894
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513026
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508628
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508378
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508310
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508640
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509160
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508702
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508428
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512208
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30517458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30519864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508542
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508948
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30526090
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512006
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30518836
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510832
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30510638
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30512718
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30513654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30509164
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30521740
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508808
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_2048235.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30508148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_2048235.30511326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
