<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_22_176252</id>
	<title>The Best, Worst, and Ugliest OSes of the Decade</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1261503720000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>itwbennett writes <i>"Hundreds of Operating Systems were released during the past decade, finding their way into microdevices, watches, refrigerators, mobile phones, cars, motorcycles, jets, even the International Space Station. Some worked; some even worked well. Others, sadly, didn't. And some were just ahead of their time. Blogger Tom Henderson takes a look back at the <a href="http://www.itworld.com/operating-systems/89733/great-disappointing-operating-systems-decade">best and worst OSes of the decade</a>. Among the worst? Vista, as you'd suspect, along with WinME. But what about GNU Hurd? And some of the best? Solaris/OpenSolaris 10, Mac OS X, and newcomer Google Android."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>itwbennett writes " Hundreds of Operating Systems were released during the past decade , finding their way into microdevices , watches , refrigerators , mobile phones , cars , motorcycles , jets , even the International Space Station .
Some worked ; some even worked well .
Others , sadly , did n't .
And some were just ahead of their time .
Blogger Tom Henderson takes a look back at the best and worst OSes of the decade .
Among the worst ?
Vista , as you 'd suspect , along with WinME .
But what about GNU Hurd ?
And some of the best ?
Solaris/OpenSolaris 10 , Mac OS X , and newcomer Google Android .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>itwbennett writes "Hundreds of Operating Systems were released during the past decade, finding their way into microdevices, watches, refrigerators, mobile phones, cars, motorcycles, jets, even the International Space Station.
Some worked; some even worked well.
Others, sadly, didn't.
And some were just ahead of their time.
Blogger Tom Henderson takes a look back at the best and worst OSes of the decade.
Among the worst?
Vista, as you'd suspect, along with WinME.
But what about GNU Hurd?
And some of the best?
Solaris/OpenSolaris 10, Mac OS X, and newcomer Google Android.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531662</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>Billly Gates</author>
	<datestamp>1261491660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fonts drive me crazy too. Its 2009 now folks!</p><p>Suse took out cleartype fonts and java apps like NetBeans wont enable it and distros have a crippled font management that looks blury on modern lcd screens. Even with the command line arguments the JVM wont produce making it butt ugly on laptop. KDE is in a very sad state. The apis supposed to be cool now but the envrionment is just <b>horrible</b>. I used to love KDE.</p><p>Gnome is nice and usable on Ubuntu now but still is not perfect. I used to like Afterstep, Window Maker, and KDE in the old days but with the eye candy in MacOSX and Vista it looks very dated. Berly can support some of the effects but most distros come with compiviz (whatever is called) which is conservative and the title bars look dated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fonts drive me crazy too .
Its 2009 now folks ! Suse took out cleartype fonts and java apps like NetBeans wont enable it and distros have a crippled font management that looks blury on modern lcd screens .
Even with the command line arguments the JVM wont produce making it butt ugly on laptop .
KDE is in a very sad state .
The apis supposed to be cool now but the envrionment is just horrible .
I used to love KDE.Gnome is nice and usable on Ubuntu now but still is not perfect .
I used to like Afterstep , Window Maker , and KDE in the old days but with the eye candy in MacOSX and Vista it looks very dated .
Berly can support some of the effects but most distros come with compiviz ( whatever is called ) which is conservative and the title bars look dated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fonts drive me crazy too.
Its 2009 now folks!Suse took out cleartype fonts and java apps like NetBeans wont enable it and distros have a crippled font management that looks blury on modern lcd screens.
Even with the command line arguments the JVM wont produce making it butt ugly on laptop.
KDE is in a very sad state.
The apis supposed to be cool now but the envrionment is just horrible.
I used to love KDE.Gnome is nice and usable on Ubuntu now but still is not perfect.
I used to like Afterstep, Window Maker, and KDE in the old days but with the eye candy in MacOSX and Vista it looks very dated.
Berly can support some of the effects but most distros come with compiviz (whatever is called) which is conservative and the title bars look dated.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30534064</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>SenseiLeNoir</author>
	<datestamp>1259757840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dont know if its practically useful to boot to DOS to run games any more on modern systems.</p><p>The old DOS games needed a "soundblaster" running on ISA, with DMA, IRQ, etc. I dont think any modern soundcard/inbuilt sound system can directly support  soundblaster emulation as HARDWARE. Almost always it will require software emulation (using some trickery). Which are probably not even produced anyway. This takes away memory from conventional ram etc, and removes the one advantage of running in pure dos.</p><p>To be honest, these days, its almost always easier to use DOSBOX, or some other DOS emulator running under Windows/Linux, which will emulate the soundblaster better anyway.</p><p>Any performance loss from the need to emulate DOS, is easily made up by the fact that back in the day, the most "hungry" DOS game maxed out at about 166Mhz Pentium Processor, with 2 or 4 MB of RAM, which current Processors are more than capable of outperforming in an emulation.</p><p>Finally running in a DOSBOX frees conventional RAM, as a "real" dos need not be present, instead just thunks to the host OS. Something that was important in those days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dont know if its practically useful to boot to DOS to run games any more on modern systems.The old DOS games needed a " soundblaster " running on ISA , with DMA , IRQ , etc .
I dont think any modern soundcard/inbuilt sound system can directly support soundblaster emulation as HARDWARE .
Almost always it will require software emulation ( using some trickery ) .
Which are probably not even produced anyway .
This takes away memory from conventional ram etc , and removes the one advantage of running in pure dos.To be honest , these days , its almost always easier to use DOSBOX , or some other DOS emulator running under Windows/Linux , which will emulate the soundblaster better anyway.Any performance loss from the need to emulate DOS , is easily made up by the fact that back in the day , the most " hungry " DOS game maxed out at about 166Mhz Pentium Processor , with 2 or 4 MB of RAM , which current Processors are more than capable of outperforming in an emulation.Finally running in a DOSBOX frees conventional RAM , as a " real " dos need not be present , instead just thunks to the host OS .
Something that was important in those days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dont know if its practically useful to boot to DOS to run games any more on modern systems.The old DOS games needed a "soundblaster" running on ISA, with DMA, IRQ, etc.
I dont think any modern soundcard/inbuilt sound system can directly support  soundblaster emulation as HARDWARE.
Almost always it will require software emulation (using some trickery).
Which are probably not even produced anyway.
This takes away memory from conventional ram etc, and removes the one advantage of running in pure dos.To be honest, these days, its almost always easier to use DOSBOX, or some other DOS emulator running under Windows/Linux, which will emulate the soundblaster better anyway.Any performance loss from the need to emulate DOS, is easily made up by the fact that back in the day, the most "hungry" DOS game maxed out at about 166Mhz Pentium Processor, with 2 or 4 MB of RAM, which current Processors are more than capable of outperforming in an emulation.Finally running in a DOSBOX frees conventional RAM, as a "real" dos need not be present, instead just thunks to the host OS.
Something that was important in those days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530748</id>
	<title>well..</title>
	<author>wentzr</author>
	<datestamp>1261484400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>any OS that doesn't require it or it's software be tied to every Fing other computer in the world would be the best OS in the past 10 years, unfortunately I can't think of many.

How the worst sell-out of unix could be considered one of the top is beyond me. Thank you Apple, sir. may I have another? The iphone was one of the worst things to happen to Apple COMPUTERS, evar.</htmltext>
<tokenext>any OS that does n't require it or it 's software be tied to every Fing other computer in the world would be the best OS in the past 10 years , unfortunately I ca n't think of many .
How the worst sell-out of unix could be considered one of the top is beyond me .
Thank you Apple , sir .
may I have another ?
The iphone was one of the worst things to happen to Apple COMPUTERS , evar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>any OS that doesn't require it or it's software be tied to every Fing other computer in the world would be the best OS in the past 10 years, unfortunately I can't think of many.
How the worst sell-out of unix could be considered one of the top is beyond me.
Thank you Apple, sir.
may I have another?
The iphone was one of the worst things to happen to Apple COMPUTERS, evar.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526246</id>
	<title>Re:BeOS</title>
	<author>ByOhTek</author>
	<datestamp>1261509660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Definetly. It could have used a secure login setup (which, I think was planned for the next release...), but otherwise it was by far my favorite OS.</p><p>Fast, stable, needed more app support, UI was quiet an clean...</p><p>*sigh*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Definetly .
It could have used a secure login setup ( which , I think was planned for the next release... ) , but otherwise it was by far my favorite OS.Fast , stable , needed more app support , UI was quiet an clean... * sigh *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Definetly.
It could have used a secure login setup (which, I think was planned for the next release...), but otherwise it was by far my favorite OS.Fast, stable, needed more app support, UI was quiet an clean...*sigh*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526994</id>
	<title>Re:Is Solaris actually good?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261512420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shadow copies of old versions of your files are saved with ZFS. There is even a slider in the Gnome file manager Nautilus that enables you to scroll back through time to old versions of your files.<br>Another notable feature is dtrace for debugging.</p><p>Generally it's fine as a desktop, although hardware support is not as good as Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shadow copies of old versions of your files are saved with ZFS .
There is even a slider in the Gnome file manager Nautilus that enables you to scroll back through time to old versions of your files.Another notable feature is dtrace for debugging.Generally it 's fine as a desktop , although hardware support is not as good as Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shadow copies of old versions of your files are saved with ZFS.
There is even a slider in the Gnome file manager Nautilus that enables you to scroll back through time to old versions of your files.Another notable feature is dtrace for debugging.Generally it's fine as a desktop, although hardware support is not as good as Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30533454</id>
	<title>The Best, Worst, and Ugliest OSes of the Decade</title>
	<author>jalal hajigholamali</author>
	<datestamp>1259744880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hi,

The Best, Worst, and Ugliest OSes of the Decade  is depend on usage

i think gnu/Linux is the best one</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi , The Best , Worst , and Ugliest OSes of the Decade is depend on usage i think gnu/Linux is the best one</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi,

The Best, Worst, and Ugliest OSes of the Decade  is depend on usage

i think gnu/Linux is the best one</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30536554</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259777400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Symbian has had multitasking for a while now. The Nokia NGage I bought in 2004 already had it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Symbian has had multitasking for a while now .
The Nokia NGage I bought in 2004 already had it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Symbian has had multitasking for a while now.
The Nokia NGage I bought in 2004 already had it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528024</id>
	<title>You're off by one</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1261472520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hurd is not half an operating system, it's one-and-a-half an operating system. In fact, this is plain to see from this excerpt of the core design spec:<br>
<br>
<i>WHO'S AN OS AND A HALF? HURD'S AN OS AND A HALF! BERSERKER PACKIN' OS AND A HALF!<br>
<br>
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH UNIX THAT HURD CAN'T FIX... WITH ITS HANDS!<br>
<br>
HURD'S COOKING WITH GAS! IT'S GOTTA HANDFUL OF X11 AND A HEADFUL OF MAD. YEAH, THAT'S YOUR GRAPHICS SERVER, BABY! DIG IT! WHO'S THE MAN? HURD'S THE MAN! HURD'S A BAD MAN! HOW BAD? REAL BAD! IT'S A 12.0 ON A 10.0 SCALE OF BADNESS!</i> <br>
<br>
In fact, that's why Hurd is late - it's so much more than just one OS that it's that much harder to code. I mean, most of the developers don't even comprehend why <tt>rip\_and\_tear(your\_guts)</tt> always stalls until the <tt>night\_train</tt> server is ready.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hurd is not half an operating system , it 's one-and-a-half an operating system .
In fact , this is plain to see from this excerpt of the core design spec : WHO 'S AN OS AND A HALF ?
HURD 'S AN OS AND A HALF !
BERSERKER PACKIN ' OS AND A HALF !
THERE 'S NOTHING WRONG WITH UNIX THAT HURD CA N'T FIX... WITH ITS HANDS !
HURD 'S COOKING WITH GAS !
IT 'S GOT TA HANDFUL OF X11 AND A HEADFUL OF MAD .
YEAH , THAT 'S YOUR GRAPHICS SERVER , BABY !
DIG IT !
WHO 'S THE MAN ?
HURD 'S THE MAN !
HURD 'S A BAD MAN !
HOW BAD ?
REAL BAD !
IT 'S A 12.0 ON A 10.0 SCALE OF BADNESS !
In fact , that 's why Hurd is late - it 's so much more than just one OS that it 's that much harder to code .
I mean , most of the developers do n't even comprehend why rip \ _and \ _tear ( your \ _guts ) always stalls until the night \ _train server is ready .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hurd is not half an operating system, it's one-and-a-half an operating system.
In fact, this is plain to see from this excerpt of the core design spec:

WHO'S AN OS AND A HALF?
HURD'S AN OS AND A HALF!
BERSERKER PACKIN' OS AND A HALF!
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH UNIX THAT HURD CAN'T FIX... WITH ITS HANDS!
HURD'S COOKING WITH GAS!
IT'S GOTTA HANDFUL OF X11 AND A HEADFUL OF MAD.
YEAH, THAT'S YOUR GRAPHICS SERVER, BABY!
DIG IT!
WHO'S THE MAN?
HURD'S THE MAN!
HURD'S A BAD MAN!
HOW BAD?
REAL BAD!
IT'S A 12.0 ON A 10.0 SCALE OF BADNESS!
In fact, that's why Hurd is late - it's so much more than just one OS that it's that much harder to code.
I mean, most of the developers don't even comprehend why rip\_and\_tear(your\_guts) always stalls until the night\_train server is ready.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30533924</id>
	<title>Re:Solaris? Give me a break.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259754600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well you're referring to the work stations and we use Sun Rays. A SunBlade 1500 is ancient kit though. We have one in the server room running a non critical work load and it keeps ticking over.</p><p>Their server kit is pretty darn good and the support we have received when something does go wrong - mostly dead or dying drives has put the other vendors to shame.</p><p>I've also not had problems with patching but then again that is when running server workloads on them so basically only the OS patches and not the applications.</p><p>We also use live upgrade to upgrade a secondary boot environment (set of file systems) and then reboot the system to use that. Falling back is one reboot away. Only ever had to fall back on an E450 when attempting to upgrade to Solaris 10. That ancient system needed its system firmware upgraded before it would run anything newer than Solaris 9.</p><p>If your servers at your new company have the same track record then it's time to hire someone who knows what they are doing. Systems are only as good as the people who put them into production and maintain them.</p><p>My biggest problem seems to be convincing my colleagues to move from the old to new SUN kit once it is ready to go.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well you 're referring to the work stations and we use Sun Rays .
A SunBlade 1500 is ancient kit though .
We have one in the server room running a non critical work load and it keeps ticking over.Their server kit is pretty darn good and the support we have received when something does go wrong - mostly dead or dying drives has put the other vendors to shame.I 've also not had problems with patching but then again that is when running server workloads on them so basically only the OS patches and not the applications.We also use live upgrade to upgrade a secondary boot environment ( set of file systems ) and then reboot the system to use that .
Falling back is one reboot away .
Only ever had to fall back on an E450 when attempting to upgrade to Solaris 10 .
That ancient system needed its system firmware upgraded before it would run anything newer than Solaris 9.If your servers at your new company have the same track record then it 's time to hire someone who knows what they are doing .
Systems are only as good as the people who put them into production and maintain them.My biggest problem seems to be convincing my colleagues to move from the old to new SUN kit once it is ready to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well you're referring to the work stations and we use Sun Rays.
A SunBlade 1500 is ancient kit though.
We have one in the server room running a non critical work load and it keeps ticking over.Their server kit is pretty darn good and the support we have received when something does go wrong - mostly dead or dying drives has put the other vendors to shame.I've also not had problems with patching but then again that is when running server workloads on them so basically only the OS patches and not the applications.We also use live upgrade to upgrade a secondary boot environment (set of file systems) and then reboot the system to use that.
Falling back is one reboot away.
Only ever had to fall back on an E450 when attempting to upgrade to Solaris 10.
That ancient system needed its system firmware upgraded before it would run anything newer than Solaris 9.If your servers at your new company have the same track record then it's time to hire someone who knows what they are doing.
Systems are only as good as the people who put them into production and maintain them.My biggest problem seems to be convincing my colleagues to move from the old to new SUN kit once it is ready to go.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526108</id>
	<title>That's a toughy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261509120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The stock answer for a modern DOS would be to hack up single user mode Linux.   Or, just have Linux and startx and exit it when you feel like you need to.</p><p>The beauty of DOS was that one application owned the entire computer but unfortunately, modern hardware has made it beyond the ability of most programmers to really do everything and you genuinely need an operating system to manage all of it, and part of that is that I think even modern hardware is probably not real time itself.  I mean, is a PC-Express bus real time guaranteed for different combinations of peripherals?  I think everything is interrupt driven these days, and that's good.  DOS was really often about programs that polled and did stupid stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The stock answer for a modern DOS would be to hack up single user mode Linux .
Or , just have Linux and startx and exit it when you feel like you need to.The beauty of DOS was that one application owned the entire computer but unfortunately , modern hardware has made it beyond the ability of most programmers to really do everything and you genuinely need an operating system to manage all of it , and part of that is that I think even modern hardware is probably not real time itself .
I mean , is a PC-Express bus real time guaranteed for different combinations of peripherals ?
I think everything is interrupt driven these days , and that 's good .
DOS was really often about programs that polled and did stupid stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The stock answer for a modern DOS would be to hack up single user mode Linux.
Or, just have Linux and startx and exit it when you feel like you need to.The beauty of DOS was that one application owned the entire computer but unfortunately, modern hardware has made it beyond the ability of most programmers to really do everything and you genuinely need an operating system to manage all of it, and part of that is that I think even modern hardware is probably not real time itself.
I mean, is a PC-Express bus real time guaranteed for different combinations of peripherals?
I think everything is interrupt driven these days, and that's good.
DOS was really often about programs that polled and did stupid stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530480</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't the decade go for one more year?</title>
	<author>cpghost</author>
	<datestamp>1261482840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>this decade Hurd's been all about switching microkernels like they are systematically proving that microkernels suck by attempting to implement hurd on each one.</p></div></blockquote><p>

No, it sucks only on Mach. On top of L4, it was unportable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>this decade Hurd 's been all about switching microkernels like they are systematically proving that microkernels suck by attempting to implement hurd on each one .
No , it sucks only on Mach .
On top of L4 , it was unportable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this decade Hurd's been all about switching microkernels like they are systematically proving that microkernels suck by attempting to implement hurd on each one.
No, it sucks only on Mach.
On top of L4, it was unportable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527150</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>man\_of\_mr\_e</author>
	<datestamp>1261512960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most DOS games work fine in a dos emulator, like DOSBox or DOSEmu... but if your apps don't work there, there's always simply using the free VMWare player to run a full virtual machine that boots DOS.</p><p>The only things that won't work will be stuff that needs a dongle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most DOS games work fine in a dos emulator , like DOSBox or DOSEmu... but if your apps do n't work there , there 's always simply using the free VMWare player to run a full virtual machine that boots DOS.The only things that wo n't work will be stuff that needs a dongle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most DOS games work fine in a dos emulator, like DOSBox or DOSEmu... but if your apps don't work there, there's always simply using the free VMWare player to run a full virtual machine that boots DOS.The only things that won't work will be stuff that needs a dongle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525898</id>
	<title>Crap Article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261508220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article is shit.  First they split Windows down to the Service Pack level, but go on to say "all of OS X and all of Linux" are in the best?  Really? OS X 10.0 was a dismal, WinME failure, for one.  And then to throw in Android, which is also Linux? WTF? The author clearly just named a handful of OSes he knew of, grabbed a blurb about them from Wikipedia, and is laughing all the way to the bank with the ad impressions from  fanboys/haters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article is shit .
First they split Windows down to the Service Pack level , but go on to say " all of OS X and all of Linux " are in the best ?
Really ? OS X 10.0 was a dismal , WinME failure , for one .
And then to throw in Android , which is also Linux ?
WTF ? The author clearly just named a handful of OSes he knew of , grabbed a blurb about them from Wikipedia , and is laughing all the way to the bank with the ad impressions from fanboys/haters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article is shit.
First they split Windows down to the Service Pack level, but go on to say "all of OS X and all of Linux" are in the best?
Really? OS X 10.0 was a dismal, WinME failure, for one.
And then to throw in Android, which is also Linux?
WTF? The author clearly just named a handful of OSes he knew of, grabbed a blurb about them from Wikipedia, and is laughing all the way to the bank with the ad impressions from  fanboys/haters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529688</id>
	<title>Re:Crap Article</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1261479300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do agree.  I'd like to have seen 10.0 and 10.1 in the "bad" column, and 10.4+ in the great.  Andoid, though based in Linux, is enough of a variant is deserved inclusion, but not without mention of iPhone OS somehwere as well.  Also note OS 9.x came out in VERY late 1999 (months after the 10.0 beta was freely available btw), and was supported until Dec 2002.  This means it came out after ME, and shoudl have EASILY made the bad list (9 was TERRIBLE, way slower than 8.5 and with no real major improvements).</p><p>Novel 6.5?  6.0 was equally as bad, and in fact has no notable feature improvements from 5.x which was released a few years earlier, and finally was the first novell OS to support TCP/IP and a friggin GUI... (that noone uses).</p><p>No mentiuon of BeOS or BSD itself (other than the semi-flawed association with OS X which is actually based on NextStep, not BSD, though it borrows a lot of code)?</p><p>Bad article.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do agree .
I 'd like to have seen 10.0 and 10.1 in the " bad " column , and 10.4 + in the great .
Andoid , though based in Linux , is enough of a variant is deserved inclusion , but not without mention of iPhone OS somehwere as well .
Also note OS 9.x came out in VERY late 1999 ( months after the 10.0 beta was freely available btw ) , and was supported until Dec 2002 .
This means it came out after ME , and shoudl have EASILY made the bad list ( 9 was TERRIBLE , way slower than 8.5 and with no real major improvements ) .Novel 6.5 ?
6.0 was equally as bad , and in fact has no notable feature improvements from 5.x which was released a few years earlier , and finally was the first novell OS to support TCP/IP and a friggin GUI... ( that noone uses ) .No mentiuon of BeOS or BSD itself ( other than the semi-flawed association with OS X which is actually based on NextStep , not BSD , though it borrows a lot of code ) ? Bad article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do agree.
I'd like to have seen 10.0 and 10.1 in the "bad" column, and 10.4+ in the great.
Andoid, though based in Linux, is enough of a variant is deserved inclusion, but not without mention of iPhone OS somehwere as well.
Also note OS 9.x came out in VERY late 1999 (months after the 10.0 beta was freely available btw), and was supported until Dec 2002.
This means it came out after ME, and shoudl have EASILY made the bad list (9 was TERRIBLE, way slower than 8.5 and with no real major improvements).Novel 6.5?
6.0 was equally as bad, and in fact has no notable feature improvements from 5.x which was released a few years earlier, and finally was the first novell OS to support TCP/IP and a friggin GUI... (that noone uses).No mentiuon of BeOS or BSD itself (other than the semi-flawed association with OS X which is actually based on NextStep, not BSD, though it borrows a lot of code)?Bad article.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529038</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>dunkelfalke</author>
	<datestamp>1261476540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry to disappoint you, dude, but you could get a fully multitasked smartphone when HTC Wallaby with Windows Mobile 2002 Phone Edition was released in April 2002. I've still got one of them, a sturdy beast, still works fine after a battery replacement. And together with a GPS receiver I can use it as a turn-to-turn navigation system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry to disappoint you , dude , but you could get a fully multitasked smartphone when HTC Wallaby with Windows Mobile 2002 Phone Edition was released in April 2002 .
I 've still got one of them , a sturdy beast , still works fine after a battery replacement .
And together with a GPS receiver I can use it as a turn-to-turn navigation system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry to disappoint you, dude, but you could get a fully multitasked smartphone when HTC Wallaby with Windows Mobile 2002 Phone Edition was released in April 2002.
I've still got one of them, a sturdy beast, still works fine after a battery replacement.
And together with a GPS receiver I can use it as a turn-to-turn navigation system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525828</id>
	<title>lucky break for slashdotters</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1261507920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just when we lost Duke Nukem Forever as the epitome of vaporware, TFA gives us the following:<blockquote><div><p>Yet the GNU Hurd kernel, the ultimate free re-write of the Unix kernel, has languished. Yes, something like it can be used inside of the Linux Debian-Hurd construct, but almost no one does this. The pure kernel, it seems, may never see the light of day. It's the ultimate in free vaporware.</p></div></blockquote><p>So we can finally put GNU/Hurd up there with the Phantom console* and DNF? <br> <br>*Note to venture capitalists: if the <b>product name</b> tells you you're being ripped off, maybe you should think twice about investing.  If that doesn't make sense to you, perhaps I can send you a prospectus on my new product, <i>Illusion</i> -- it's the Flim-Flam for Web 3.0 Social Networking.  We need about 30 million and two years to get the product out.  <i>Illusion</i> is going to revolutionize direct revenue streams for social networking sites.  Call me!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just when we lost Duke Nukem Forever as the epitome of vaporware , TFA gives us the following : Yet the GNU Hurd kernel , the ultimate free re-write of the Unix kernel , has languished .
Yes , something like it can be used inside of the Linux Debian-Hurd construct , but almost no one does this .
The pure kernel , it seems , may never see the light of day .
It 's the ultimate in free vaporware.So we can finally put GNU/Hurd up there with the Phantom console * and DNF ?
* Note to venture capitalists : if the product name tells you you 're being ripped off , maybe you should think twice about investing .
If that does n't make sense to you , perhaps I can send you a prospectus on my new product , Illusion -- it 's the Flim-Flam for Web 3.0 Social Networking .
We need about 30 million and two years to get the product out .
Illusion is going to revolutionize direct revenue streams for social networking sites .
Call me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just when we lost Duke Nukem Forever as the epitome of vaporware, TFA gives us the following:Yet the GNU Hurd kernel, the ultimate free re-write of the Unix kernel, has languished.
Yes, something like it can be used inside of the Linux Debian-Hurd construct, but almost no one does this.
The pure kernel, it seems, may never see the light of day.
It's the ultimate in free vaporware.So we can finally put GNU/Hurd up there with the Phantom console* and DNF?
*Note to venture capitalists: if the product name tells you you're being ripped off, maybe you should think twice about investing.
If that doesn't make sense to you, perhaps I can send you a prospectus on my new product, Illusion -- it's the Flim-Flam for Web 3.0 Social Networking.
We need about 30 million and two years to get the product out.
Illusion is going to revolutionize direct revenue streams for social networking sites.
Call me!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528214</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261473180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ugliest OS: $ANY\_LINUX\_DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one. I can make a linux pretty, but I'm talking about defaults. Often with some of the most amateurish desktop backgrounds. People make better art with MS Paint. No really they do. <a href="http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/incredible-ms-paint-artwork" title="techeblog.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/incredible-ms-paint-artwork</a> [techeblog.com]</p> </div><p>Linux mint</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ugliest OS : $ ANY \ _LINUX \ _DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one .
I can make a linux pretty , but I 'm talking about defaults .
Often with some of the most amateurish desktop backgrounds .
People make better art with MS Paint .
No really they do .
http : //www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/incredible-ms-paint-artwork [ techeblog.com ] Linux mint</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ugliest OS: $ANY\_LINUX\_DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one.
I can make a linux pretty, but I'm talking about defaults.
Often with some of the most amateurish desktop backgrounds.
People make better art with MS Paint.
No really they do.
http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/incredible-ms-paint-artwork [techeblog.com] Linux mint
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527516</id>
	<title>Re:Is Solaris actually good?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261514220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slower? Get real, Solaris is much faster than Linux. Under a heavy load that is, mind you. If your computer is 97\% idle, it all doesn't matter.</p><p>But when the crunching begins (webserver, several databases, heavy batches running in the background) then you will see the difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slower ?
Get real , Solaris is much faster than Linux .
Under a heavy load that is , mind you .
If your computer is 97 \ % idle , it all does n't matter.But when the crunching begins ( webserver , several databases , heavy batches running in the background ) then you will see the difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slower?
Get real, Solaris is much faster than Linux.
Under a heavy load that is, mind you.
If your computer is 97\% idle, it all doesn't matter.But when the crunching begins (webserver, several databases, heavy batches running in the background) then you will see the difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794</id>
	<title>like...WHATever, dood...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261507800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Vista gave the good admins the ability to have a completely safe computer. WinME was the best of the 9x line after you took 30 seconds to put DOS back in. 'Blogger Tom Henderson' is a moron, but indicitive of the slashdot community.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Vista gave the good admins the ability to have a completely safe computer .
WinME was the best of the 9x line after you took 30 seconds to put DOS back in .
'Blogger Tom Henderson ' is a moron , but indicitive of the slashdot community .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vista gave the good admins the ability to have a completely safe computer.
WinME was the best of the 9x line after you took 30 seconds to put DOS back in.
'Blogger Tom Henderson' is a moron, but indicitive of the slashdot community.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525922</id>
	<title>Android isn't an OS</title>
	<author>Wee</author>
	<datestamp>1261508280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Android is just a bunch of Java apps running on Linux.  That's an OS?
<br> <br>

-B</htmltext>
<tokenext>Android is just a bunch of Java apps running on Linux .
That 's an OS ?
-B</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Android is just a bunch of Java apps running on Linux.
That's an OS?
-B</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526170</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261509360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS DOS is garbage, though, and it certainly doesn't give the games any more resources, as it has the old '640 KB ought to be enough for everyone' limit. What you love isn't the OS, it's the games it could run.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS DOS is garbage , though , and it certainly does n't give the games any more resources , as it has the old '640 KB ought to be enough for everyone ' limit .
What you love is n't the OS , it 's the games it could run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS DOS is garbage, though, and it certainly doesn't give the games any more resources, as it has the old '640 KB ought to be enough for everyone' limit.
What you love isn't the OS, it's the games it could run.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532372</id>
	<title>Re:Is Solaris actually good?</title>
	<author>Cogline</author>
	<datestamp>1261500660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use OpenSolaris on two systems at home, my desktop and a server (print and squid).</p><p>OpenSolaris provides a choice of userland (utilities) by setting the order of your path. So for those concerned about "incompatibilities" or "taint", you can choose your own userland, associated trappings, and level of standards conformance.</p><p>OS upgrades, or other significant package installs, are a no risk endeavor since the zfs root clones mean that you can boot to or rollback to a previous (working) instance if things go wrong. Snapshots from package installs and time-slider also provide a sense of security that you can "get back to that thing you just lost".</p><p>The package system deliberately has a concept of OS release, and ties the packages you install to that version. This reduces some of the confusion and problems that come from choosing packages implicitly based on a URL. Moreover, it also has means for a third-party vendor to host their own package repo and integrate it into the overall package scheme with user accounts, as appropriate.</p><p>The version you can download has all of the same features as that used in server rooms; so you can see how Sun met their customer requests for enterprise features compared to other distributions. Not just iSCSI and zones, but also MPIO among others are there for review.</p><p>The introduction of features to Open/Solaris feels more mature and predictable. Linux leads the bleeding edge with ideas and issues, whereas Solaris is a few steps behind, with solutions that feel more thought out.</p><p>If you'd like to meet OpenSolaris half-way, try Nexenta: http://nexenta.org/ which is the OpenSolaris kernel with a GNU (Debian) userland.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use OpenSolaris on two systems at home , my desktop and a server ( print and squid ) .OpenSolaris provides a choice of userland ( utilities ) by setting the order of your path .
So for those concerned about " incompatibilities " or " taint " , you can choose your own userland , associated trappings , and level of standards conformance.OS upgrades , or other significant package installs , are a no risk endeavor since the zfs root clones mean that you can boot to or rollback to a previous ( working ) instance if things go wrong .
Snapshots from package installs and time-slider also provide a sense of security that you can " get back to that thing you just lost " .The package system deliberately has a concept of OS release , and ties the packages you install to that version .
This reduces some of the confusion and problems that come from choosing packages implicitly based on a URL .
Moreover , it also has means for a third-party vendor to host their own package repo and integrate it into the overall package scheme with user accounts , as appropriate.The version you can download has all of the same features as that used in server rooms ; so you can see how Sun met their customer requests for enterprise features compared to other distributions .
Not just iSCSI and zones , but also MPIO among others are there for review.The introduction of features to Open/Solaris feels more mature and predictable .
Linux leads the bleeding edge with ideas and issues , whereas Solaris is a few steps behind , with solutions that feel more thought out.If you 'd like to meet OpenSolaris half-way , try Nexenta : http : //nexenta.org/ which is the OpenSolaris kernel with a GNU ( Debian ) userland .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use OpenSolaris on two systems at home, my desktop and a server (print and squid).OpenSolaris provides a choice of userland (utilities) by setting the order of your path.
So for those concerned about "incompatibilities" or "taint", you can choose your own userland, associated trappings, and level of standards conformance.OS upgrades, or other significant package installs, are a no risk endeavor since the zfs root clones mean that you can boot to or rollback to a previous (working) instance if things go wrong.
Snapshots from package installs and time-slider also provide a sense of security that you can "get back to that thing you just lost".The package system deliberately has a concept of OS release, and ties the packages you install to that version.
This reduces some of the confusion and problems that come from choosing packages implicitly based on a URL.
Moreover, it also has means for a third-party vendor to host their own package repo and integrate it into the overall package scheme with user accounts, as appropriate.The version you can download has all of the same features as that used in server rooms; so you can see how Sun met their customer requests for enterprise features compared to other distributions.
Not just iSCSI and zones, but also MPIO among others are there for review.The introduction of features to Open/Solaris feels more mature and predictable.
Linux leads the bleeding edge with ideas and issues, whereas Solaris is a few steps behind, with solutions that feel more thought out.If you'd like to meet OpenSolaris half-way, try Nexenta: http://nexenta.org/ which is the OpenSolaris kernel with a GNU (Debian) userland.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527698</id>
	<title>Re:IMHO solaris has a really bad userland</title>
	<author>NotBornYesterday</author>
	<datestamp>1261514700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I suppose that depends on what the user wants to do, doesn't it?    Solaris rocks for its stability, power, security, ZFS, and containers, among other things, which makes sense considering it is generally used (and intended) as a server OS rather than desktop.  But that's not to say it's not a good user desktop for web &amp; office (OpenOffice), and other end user apps that are available for it, which is all many people need.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I suppose that depends on what the user wants to do , does n't it ?
Solaris rocks for its stability , power , security , ZFS , and containers , among other things , which makes sense considering it is generally used ( and intended ) as a server OS rather than desktop .
But that 's not to say it 's not a good user desktop for web &amp; office ( OpenOffice ) , and other end user apps that are available for it , which is all many people need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suppose that depends on what the user wants to do, doesn't it?
Solaris rocks for its stability, power, security, ZFS, and containers, among other things, which makes sense considering it is generally used (and intended) as a server OS rather than desktop.
But that's not to say it's not a good user desktop for web &amp; office (OpenOffice), and other end user apps that are available for it, which is all many people need.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528672</id>
	<title>Re:like...WHATever, dood...</title>
	<author>Utoxin</author>
	<datestamp>1261475100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... Um. Wow. Just wow.</p><p>See, I worked as a microsoft support tech for a while shortly after the release of Windows ME. A dark period in my career, I'll admit. But aside from a few nice troubleshooting tools (msconfig FTMFW), ME sucked beyond belief.</p><p>Troubleshooting Step 1: Reboot. If that solved the problem, we told the customer it was fixed, and to call back if it happened again. Really.</p><p>And at least once a day, I would determine that a machine was beyond recovery, and we would FFR it. (Fdisk, Format, Reinstall). And my experiences were pretty standard, from what I heard around me on the support floor. People who had transferred to the ME support team from 9X complained about how buggy and poorly designed ME was.</p><p>*shudders* So... no. ME was not the best of the 9x line. Arguably, 98SE was the best, although some people preferred 95.</p><p>Also, the article completely messes up the history of 2000 / 9X / ME. 2000 was<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/NOT/ the hybrid of 9X and NT. 2000 was the end of the NT line, and a damn fine OS. I ran it for many years, until my last CD bit the dust, and I grudgingly updated to XP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... Um. Wow .
Just wow.See , I worked as a microsoft support tech for a while shortly after the release of Windows ME .
A dark period in my career , I 'll admit .
But aside from a few nice troubleshooting tools ( msconfig FTMFW ) , ME sucked beyond belief.Troubleshooting Step 1 : Reboot .
If that solved the problem , we told the customer it was fixed , and to call back if it happened again .
Really.And at least once a day , I would determine that a machine was beyond recovery , and we would FFR it .
( Fdisk , Format , Reinstall ) .
And my experiences were pretty standard , from what I heard around me on the support floor .
People who had transferred to the ME support team from 9X complained about how buggy and poorly designed ME was .
* shudders * So... no. ME was not the best of the 9x line .
Arguably , 98SE was the best , although some people preferred 95.Also , the article completely messes up the history of 2000 / 9X / ME .
2000 was /NOT/ the hybrid of 9X and NT .
2000 was the end of the NT line , and a damn fine OS .
I ran it for many years , until my last CD bit the dust , and I grudgingly updated to XP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Um. Wow.
Just wow.See, I worked as a microsoft support tech for a while shortly after the release of Windows ME.
A dark period in my career, I'll admit.
But aside from a few nice troubleshooting tools (msconfig FTMFW), ME sucked beyond belief.Troubleshooting Step 1: Reboot.
If that solved the problem, we told the customer it was fixed, and to call back if it happened again.
Really.And at least once a day, I would determine that a machine was beyond recovery, and we would FFR it.
(Fdisk, Format, Reinstall).
And my experiences were pretty standard, from what I heard around me on the support floor.
People who had transferred to the ME support team from 9X complained about how buggy and poorly designed ME was.
*shudders* So... no. ME was not the best of the 9x line.
Arguably, 98SE was the best, although some people preferred 95.Also, the article completely messes up the history of 2000 / 9X / ME.
2000 was /NOT/ the hybrid of 9X and NT.
2000 was the end of the NT line, and a damn fine OS.
I ran it for many years, until my last CD bit the dust, and I grudgingly updated to XP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526710</id>
	<title>Re:BeOS</title>
	<author>imakemusic</author>
	<datestamp>1261511460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm still missing it.<br>Such high hopes and potential.<br>Should check out haiku.</p><p>ftfy</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm still missing it.Such high hopes and potential.Should check out haiku.ftfy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm still missing it.Such high hopes and potential.Should check out haiku.ftfy</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30536208</id>
	<title>Re:lucky break for slashdotters</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1259775780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I didn't RTFA, and that quote makes me glad that I didn't.  It's absolute nonsense.  There is no such thing as the 'Linux Debian-Hurd construct'.  There is Debian, which is an OS and supports various kernels, including Linux, HURD, and FreeBSD.  You can install Debian with a Linux kernel, then install a HURD kernel and boot that (it adds a line to your GRUB config).  HURD works well enough to start GNOME or KDE and run apps, but the hardware support is quite limited and performance isn't great either.  It's still actively developed, but only by a few people.  I've only played with it a bit, but the ratio of developer time to achievement for HURD seems to be more impressive than for Linux.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't RTFA , and that quote makes me glad that I did n't .
It 's absolute nonsense .
There is no such thing as the 'Linux Debian-Hurd construct' .
There is Debian , which is an OS and supports various kernels , including Linux , HURD , and FreeBSD .
You can install Debian with a Linux kernel , then install a HURD kernel and boot that ( it adds a line to your GRUB config ) .
HURD works well enough to start GNOME or KDE and run apps , but the hardware support is quite limited and performance is n't great either .
It 's still actively developed , but only by a few people .
I 've only played with it a bit , but the ratio of developer time to achievement for HURD seems to be more impressive than for Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't RTFA, and that quote makes me glad that I didn't.
It's absolute nonsense.
There is no such thing as the 'Linux Debian-Hurd construct'.
There is Debian, which is an OS and supports various kernels, including Linux, HURD, and FreeBSD.
You can install Debian with a Linux kernel, then install a HURD kernel and boot that (it adds a line to your GRUB config).
HURD works well enough to start GNOME or KDE and run apps, but the hardware support is quite limited and performance isn't great either.
It's still actively developed, but only by a few people.
I've only played with it a bit, but the ratio of developer time to achievement for HURD seems to be more impressive than for Linux.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526304</id>
	<title>Re:Android isn't an OS</title>
	<author>Galestar</author>
	<datestamp>1261509960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also, Considering that Android hasn't yet had time to mature as an OS, it is quite presumptuous of the author to name it one of the [great os's of the decade].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , Considering that Android has n't yet had time to mature as an OS , it is quite presumptuous of the author to name it one of the [ great os 's of the decade ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, Considering that Android hasn't yet had time to mature as an OS, it is quite presumptuous of the author to name it one of the [great os's of the decade].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526222</id>
	<title>Doesn't the decade go for one more year?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261509540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So Solaris is "good."   They've clearly never used it for any length of time...</p><p>No mention of XP?  I'm not a windows guy but I don't see how you can ignore XP and mention Hurd at all...   Come on,  hurd was a disappoint long before 2000 or 2001,  this decade Hurd's been all about switching microkernels like they are systematically proving that microkernels suck by attempting to implement hurd on each one.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So Solaris is " good .
" They 've clearly never used it for any length of time...No mention of XP ?
I 'm not a windows guy but I do n't see how you can ignore XP and mention Hurd at all... Come on , hurd was a disappoint long before 2000 or 2001 , this decade Hurd 's been all about switching microkernels like they are systematically proving that microkernels suck by attempting to implement hurd on each one .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Solaris is "good.
"   They've clearly never used it for any length of time...No mention of XP?
I'm not a windows guy but I don't see how you can ignore XP and mention Hurd at all...   Come on,  hurd was a disappoint long before 2000 or 2001,  this decade Hurd's been all about switching microkernels like they are systematically proving that microkernels suck by attempting to implement hurd on each one.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30571562</id>
	<title>The Best, Worst, and Ugliest OSes of the Decade</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262018400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I think we can all agree on one thing though, Windows 7 is an awesome OS. I'm glad IT Pros and others can put Vista behind and now enjoy the new OS.</p><p>If you guys want to join in on the Windows 7 conversation on Twitter, feel free to follow us @MSSpringboard , the official feed for Windows 7 IT Pros and @CIOsConnect where we discuss more enterprise related topics.</p><p>Happy Holidays!<br>Alex<br>Microsoft Windows Client Team</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I think we can all agree on one thing though , Windows 7 is an awesome OS .
I 'm glad IT Pros and others can put Vista behind and now enjoy the new OS.If you guys want to join in on the Windows 7 conversation on Twitter , feel free to follow us @ MSSpringboard , the official feed for Windows 7 IT Pros and @ CIOsConnect where we discuss more enterprise related topics.Happy Holidays ! AlexMicrosoft Windows Client Team</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I think we can all agree on one thing though, Windows 7 is an awesome OS.
I'm glad IT Pros and others can put Vista behind and now enjoy the new OS.If you guys want to join in on the Windows 7 conversation on Twitter, feel free to follow us @MSSpringboard , the official feed for Windows 7 IT Pros and @CIOsConnect where we discuss more enterprise related topics.Happy Holidays!AlexMicrosoft Windows Client Team</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</id>
	<title>Love the droid</title>
	<author>w0mprat</author>
	<datestamp>1261510860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Best OS: Android IMHO it is more sophisticated than it's competitors. Before you mod me down iPhone fan bois, Android has brought genuine multitasking to the smartphone platform amongst other things. Oh and the aftermarket firmware and themeing community is thriving. It's not great, but it's the newest thing thats making alot of hackers, tweakers and gadget addicts learn to love again. Hopefully an official Google phone will re-center the AOSP and do more than keep the project alive, but really ramp things up.
<br> <br>
Worst OS: Solaris without a doubt. In my own experience it doesn't perform like linux does now, ZFS is cool but just confuses me and the userland is the most horrible thing ever.
<br> <br>
Ugliest OS: $ANY\_LINUX\_DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one. I can make a linux pretty, but I'm talking about defaults. Often with some of the most amateurish desktop backgrounds. People make better art with MS Paint. No really they do. <a href="http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/incredible-ms-paint-artwork" title="techeblog.com">http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/incredible-ms-paint-artwork</a> [techeblog.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Best OS : Android IMHO it is more sophisticated than it 's competitors .
Before you mod me down iPhone fan bois , Android has brought genuine multitasking to the smartphone platform amongst other things .
Oh and the aftermarket firmware and themeing community is thriving .
It 's not great , but it 's the newest thing thats making alot of hackers , tweakers and gadget addicts learn to love again .
Hopefully an official Google phone will re-center the AOSP and do more than keep the project alive , but really ramp things up .
Worst OS : Solaris without a doubt .
In my own experience it does n't perform like linux does now , ZFS is cool but just confuses me and the userland is the most horrible thing ever .
Ugliest OS : $ ANY \ _LINUX \ _DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one .
I can make a linux pretty , but I 'm talking about defaults .
Often with some of the most amateurish desktop backgrounds .
People make better art with MS Paint .
No really they do .
http : //www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/incredible-ms-paint-artwork [ techeblog.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Best OS: Android IMHO it is more sophisticated than it's competitors.
Before you mod me down iPhone fan bois, Android has brought genuine multitasking to the smartphone platform amongst other things.
Oh and the aftermarket firmware and themeing community is thriving.
It's not great, but it's the newest thing thats making alot of hackers, tweakers and gadget addicts learn to love again.
Hopefully an official Google phone will re-center the AOSP and do more than keep the project alive, but really ramp things up.
Worst OS: Solaris without a doubt.
In my own experience it doesn't perform like linux does now, ZFS is cool but just confuses me and the userland is the most horrible thing ever.
Ugliest OS: $ANY\_LINUX\_DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one.
I can make a linux pretty, but I'm talking about defaults.
Often with some of the most amateurish desktop backgrounds.
People make better art with MS Paint.
No really they do.
http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/incredible-ms-paint-artwork [techeblog.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525856</id>
	<title>Again?</title>
	<author>Last\_Available\_Usern</author>
	<datestamp>1261507980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>
What is this, the third post today alone that primarily slams Microsoft?  I was glad to hear today that MS at least wasn't threatening the wild species of coffee beans.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is this , the third post today alone that primarily slams Microsoft ?
I was glad to hear today that MS at least was n't threatening the wild species of coffee beans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
What is this, the third post today alone that primarily slams Microsoft?
I was glad to hear today that MS at least wasn't threatening the wild species of coffee beans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526480</id>
	<title>HIMEM</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1261510560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>MS DOS is garbage, though, and it certainly doesn't give the games any more resources, as it has the old '640 KB ought to be enough for everyone' limit.</p></div><p>There was HIMEM.SYS, and there were also 32-bit DOS extenders such as DOS4GW and CWSDPMI to make the best use of it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>MS DOS is garbage , though , and it certainly does n't give the games any more resources , as it has the old '640 KB ought to be enough for everyone ' limit.There was HIMEM.SYS , and there were also 32-bit DOS extenders such as DOS4GW and CWSDPMI to make the best use of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS DOS is garbage, though, and it certainly doesn't give the games any more resources, as it has the old '640 KB ought to be enough for everyone' limit.There was HIMEM.SYS, and there were also 32-bit DOS extenders such as DOS4GW and CWSDPMI to make the best use of it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526064</id>
	<title>Re:What a total waste of time</title>
	<author>digitalloving</author>
	<datestamp>1261509000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I couldn't agree more with your comment.  This article is a complete waste of time and has no interesting or useful content.  It bothers me that technical magazines these days feel like they can get away with writing something with so little substance.

It really is an article equivalent of a troll.  I wonder if NASCAR magazine writers write about the differences between Ford, Chevy and Dodge just so they can get people fired up.  Absolutely not slashdot worthy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I could n't agree more with your comment .
This article is a complete waste of time and has no interesting or useful content .
It bothers me that technical magazines these days feel like they can get away with writing something with so little substance .
It really is an article equivalent of a troll .
I wonder if NASCAR magazine writers write about the differences between Ford , Chevy and Dodge just so they can get people fired up .
Absolutely not slashdot worthy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I couldn't agree more with your comment.
This article is a complete waste of time and has no interesting or useful content.
It bothers me that technical magazines these days feel like they can get away with writing something with so little substance.
It really is an article equivalent of a troll.
I wonder if NASCAR magazine writers write about the differences between Ford, Chevy and Dodge just so they can get people fired up.
Absolutely not slashdot worthy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526050</id>
	<title>Re:like...WHATever, dood...</title>
	<author>ivucica</author>
	<datestamp>1261508940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Best OS of 9x line was Windows 95 OSR2. 98 sucked horseballs with its instability, only second to ME's. I praised the Lord for Windows 2000 - the nicest and most professional-looking-and-feeling OS of the NT line.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Best OS of 9x line was Windows 95 OSR2 .
98 sucked horseballs with its instability , only second to ME 's .
I praised the Lord for Windows 2000 - the nicest and most professional-looking-and-feeling OS of the NT line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Best OS of 9x line was Windows 95 OSR2.
98 sucked horseballs with its instability, only second to ME's.
I praised the Lord for Windows 2000 - the nicest and most professional-looking-and-feeling OS of the NT line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526142</id>
	<title>Aren't we looking at this a year too early</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261509240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last I checked the first decade of the 21st century doesn't end until Dec 31, 2010. Or are we speaking of decades in the more arbitrary sense of 10 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last I checked the first decade of the 21st century does n't end until Dec 31 , 2010 .
Or are we speaking of decades in the more arbitrary sense of 10 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last I checked the first decade of the 21st century doesn't end until Dec 31, 2010.
Or are we speaking of decades in the more arbitrary sense of 10 years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527498</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>[WC]DrEvil</author>
	<datestamp>1261514160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Worst OS: Solaris without a doubt. In my own experience it doesn't perform like linux does now, ZFS is cool but just confuses me and the userland is the most horrible thing ever.</p></div><p>So the almost completely GNU-based userland, that is the default in OpenSolaris 2009.x releases, is the worst ever?</p><p>Or were you simply basing your criticisms on Solaris 10, which ships the GNU userland, but doesn't set it as the default one?</p><p>As for "doesn't perform like Linux does now" is there some specific issue you had, otherwise that's pretty vague.  I've had performance issues at one time or another with every OS I've ever used over the last 25 years.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Worst OS : Solaris without a doubt .
In my own experience it does n't perform like linux does now , ZFS is cool but just confuses me and the userland is the most horrible thing ever.So the almost completely GNU-based userland , that is the default in OpenSolaris 2009.x releases , is the worst ever ? Or were you simply basing your criticisms on Solaris 10 , which ships the GNU userland , but does n't set it as the default one ? As for " does n't perform like Linux does now " is there some specific issue you had , otherwise that 's pretty vague .
I 've had performance issues at one time or another with every OS I 've ever used over the last 25 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Worst OS: Solaris without a doubt.
In my own experience it doesn't perform like linux does now, ZFS is cool but just confuses me and the userland is the most horrible thing ever.So the almost completely GNU-based userland, that is the default in OpenSolaris 2009.x releases, is the worst ever?Or were you simply basing your criticisms on Solaris 10, which ships the GNU userland, but doesn't set it as the default one?As for "doesn't perform like Linux does now" is there some specific issue you had, otherwise that's pretty vague.
I've had performance issues at one time or another with every OS I've ever used over the last 25 years.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526152</id>
	<title>Re:like...WHATever, dood...</title>
	<author>RyuuzakiTetsuya</author>
	<datestamp>1261509240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Win ME wasn't much better than 98SE, but with the caveat that you had to make sure all of your system drivers were for ME, not 98.</p><p>It was 2001.  Putting DOS realmode support back into it is like putting OS9 compatibility into OSX.  Big deal.  DOS real mode didn't do much for the 32bit Windows subsystems that *were* the problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Win ME was n't much better than 98SE , but with the caveat that you had to make sure all of your system drivers were for ME , not 98.It was 2001 .
Putting DOS realmode support back into it is like putting OS9 compatibility into OSX .
Big deal .
DOS real mode did n't do much for the 32bit Windows subsystems that * were * the problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Win ME wasn't much better than 98SE, but with the caveat that you had to make sure all of your system drivers were for ME, not 98.It was 2001.
Putting DOS realmode support back into it is like putting OS9 compatibility into OSX.
Big deal.
DOS real mode didn't do much for the 32bit Windows subsystems that *were* the problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525928</id>
	<title>Server 2008?</title>
	<author>bbbaldie</author>
	<datestamp>1261508340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It may be more secure, but the programmers who rewrote its interface to look like Vista need to be whipped and put in the stocks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It may be more secure , but the programmers who rewrote its interface to look like Vista need to be whipped and put in the stocks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It may be more secure, but the programmers who rewrote its interface to look like Vista need to be whipped and put in the stocks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30537246</id>
	<title>Re:Is Solaris actually good?</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1259781480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't believe that NFS exports and iSCSI target mangement are integrated into ZFS on the BSD ports, but I could be wrong.</p></div><p>NFS is. You enable it the usual way, then <tt>zfs share tank/foo</tt> does the right thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't believe that NFS exports and iSCSI target mangement are integrated into ZFS on the BSD ports , but I could be wrong.NFS is .
You enable it the usual way , then zfs share tank/foo does the right thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't believe that NFS exports and iSCSI target mangement are integrated into ZFS on the BSD ports, but I could be wrong.NFS is.
You enable it the usual way, then zfs share tank/foo does the right thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529416</id>
	<title>Re:What a total waste of time</title>
	<author>adbge</author>
	<datestamp>1261478040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I mean if they had broken OS's down by functionality, design and architecture it might be worth some time but this strikes me as an article anyone with quarter a clue could write in about a half hour.</p></div><p>Does anyone know of such an article? Something comparing different operating systems/distros by philosophy, etc. I am very interested in reading a quality breakdown of the differences between modern operating systems.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean if they had broken OS 's down by functionality , design and architecture it might be worth some time but this strikes me as an article anyone with quarter a clue could write in about a half hour.Does anyone know of such an article ?
Something comparing different operating systems/distros by philosophy , etc .
I am very interested in reading a quality breakdown of the differences between modern operating systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean if they had broken OS's down by functionality, design and architecture it might be worth some time but this strikes me as an article anyone with quarter a clue could write in about a half hour.Does anyone know of such an article?
Something comparing different operating systems/distros by philosophy, etc.
I am very interested in reading a quality breakdown of the differences between modern operating systems.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252</id>
	<title>Solaris? Give me a break.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261509660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh please. I'm kinda glad I lost my job supporting Solaris apps. Our apps were relatively easy to get working, but the Solaris machines management dropped off at my desk (last one was a Blade 1500) were just stupid and showed a blantant lack of quality assurance, and nothing ever worked out of the box. You'd think by now you could buy a desktop machine from them and expect the backspace key to actually work as just one example - or to be able to log into the desktop without facing a dozen cryptic errors. No - expect to spend days or years applying patches, tweaking config files - and even then nothing will ever work as seemless as Windows or Mac (or even Linux these days). Oh sure on paper Solaris might be superior to anything out there, but as anyone who has worked in software knows - its the little problems that make a failed product.</p><p>Most every patch I got from Sun as well - never worked on the first go. I honestly think its a conspiracy - only system vendor I can think of btw that charges you for a) access to their KB and b) access to hotfixes - not even Microsoft is that evil. It wasn't uncommon for hotfixes/patches to break all kinds of crap too. I once wrote up a list of weird things I never was able to fix on the Sun boxes I and others had on their desks and it was easily pages long. Mind you - these were ALL minor issues, but annoying enough to make it unpleasant. At the job I have now - all the Solaris machines (servers mostly) have the same track record...</p><p>In terms of user friendlyness, ease of use, support - I'd take Vista any day of the week.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh please .
I 'm kinda glad I lost my job supporting Solaris apps .
Our apps were relatively easy to get working , but the Solaris machines management dropped off at my desk ( last one was a Blade 1500 ) were just stupid and showed a blantant lack of quality assurance , and nothing ever worked out of the box .
You 'd think by now you could buy a desktop machine from them and expect the backspace key to actually work as just one example - or to be able to log into the desktop without facing a dozen cryptic errors .
No - expect to spend days or years applying patches , tweaking config files - and even then nothing will ever work as seemless as Windows or Mac ( or even Linux these days ) .
Oh sure on paper Solaris might be superior to anything out there , but as anyone who has worked in software knows - its the little problems that make a failed product.Most every patch I got from Sun as well - never worked on the first go .
I honestly think its a conspiracy - only system vendor I can think of btw that charges you for a ) access to their KB and b ) access to hotfixes - not even Microsoft is that evil .
It was n't uncommon for hotfixes/patches to break all kinds of crap too .
I once wrote up a list of weird things I never was able to fix on the Sun boxes I and others had on their desks and it was easily pages long .
Mind you - these were ALL minor issues , but annoying enough to make it unpleasant .
At the job I have now - all the Solaris machines ( servers mostly ) have the same track record...In terms of user friendlyness , ease of use , support - I 'd take Vista any day of the week .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh please.
I'm kinda glad I lost my job supporting Solaris apps.
Our apps were relatively easy to get working, but the Solaris machines management dropped off at my desk (last one was a Blade 1500) were just stupid and showed a blantant lack of quality assurance, and nothing ever worked out of the box.
You'd think by now you could buy a desktop machine from them and expect the backspace key to actually work as just one example - or to be able to log into the desktop without facing a dozen cryptic errors.
No - expect to spend days or years applying patches, tweaking config files - and even then nothing will ever work as seemless as Windows or Mac (or even Linux these days).
Oh sure on paper Solaris might be superior to anything out there, but as anyone who has worked in software knows - its the little problems that make a failed product.Most every patch I got from Sun as well - never worked on the first go.
I honestly think its a conspiracy - only system vendor I can think of btw that charges you for a) access to their KB and b) access to hotfixes - not even Microsoft is that evil.
It wasn't uncommon for hotfixes/patches to break all kinds of crap too.
I once wrote up a list of weird things I never was able to fix on the Sun boxes I and others had on their desks and it was easily pages long.
Mind you - these were ALL minor issues, but annoying enough to make it unpleasant.
At the job I have now - all the Solaris machines (servers mostly) have the same track record...In terms of user friendlyness, ease of use, support - I'd take Vista any day of the week.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526456</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdoted already?</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1261510500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is about OSes.</p><p>Windows up to WfW3.11 was a user environment.  MS-DOS/PC-DOS were the OS choices.</p><p>Of course, Windows 1.x up to 3.0 was somewhat limited by CGA and VGA displays.  Garish is what you get with 16 colors.  At 256, you just get stark.  After that, you get displays useful for pr0n.  And Doom.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is about OSes.Windows up to WfW3.11 was a user environment .
MS-DOS/PC-DOS were the OS choices.Of course , Windows 1.x up to 3.0 was somewhat limited by CGA and VGA displays .
Garish is what you get with 16 colors .
At 256 , you just get stark .
After that , you get displays useful for pr0n .
And Doom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is about OSes.Windows up to WfW3.11 was a user environment.
MS-DOS/PC-DOS were the OS choices.Of course, Windows 1.x up to 3.0 was somewhat limited by CGA and VGA displays.
Garish is what you get with 16 colors.
At 256, you just get stark.
After that, you get displays useful for pr0n.
And Doom.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528034</id>
	<title>the decade?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261472580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay I know this is flamebait, but it's really starting to annoy me.  What's with all the "of the decade" lists when there's ANOTHER YEAR before the decade is over.  We didn't start counting the years from 0, the religious types at the time weren't computer scientists, so they started at 1, so the decade isn't done until the end of 2010.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay I know this is flamebait , but it 's really starting to annoy me .
What 's with all the " of the decade " lists when there 's ANOTHER YEAR before the decade is over .
We did n't start counting the years from 0 , the religious types at the time were n't computer scientists , so they started at 1 , so the decade is n't done until the end of 2010 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay I know this is flamebait, but it's really starting to annoy me.
What's with all the "of the decade" lists when there's ANOTHER YEAR before the decade is over.
We didn't start counting the years from 0, the religious types at the time weren't computer scientists, so they started at 1, so the decade isn't done until the end of 2010.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526442</id>
	<title>*Ring* *Ring*</title>
	<author>Stupid McStupidson</author>
	<datestamp>1261510500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>     Timothy, this is reading comprehension calling, we need to talk. The name of the article is "Great and Disappointing" not "Best and Worse" nor is ugly mentioned. Oh wait, this is Slashdot.

NM sorry</htmltext>
<tokenext>Timothy , this is reading comprehension calling , we need to talk .
The name of the article is " Great and Disappointing " not " Best and Worse " nor is ugly mentioned .
Oh wait , this is Slashdot .
NM sorry</tokentext>
<sentencetext>     Timothy, this is reading comprehension calling, we need to talk.
The name of the article is "Great and Disappointing" not "Best and Worse" nor is ugly mentioned.
Oh wait, this is Slashdot.
NM sorry</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527276</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261513440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about this for MS Paint......<br>http://www.mspaintporn.net/index2.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about this for MS Paint......http : //www.mspaintporn.net/index2.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about this for MS Paint......http://www.mspaintporn.net/index2.html</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30601544</id>
	<title>Re:Solaris? Give me a break.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259848260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm certainly not surprised you lost your Solaris job. You obviously didn't know what you were doing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm certainly not surprised you lost your Solaris job .
You obviously did n't know what you were doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm certainly not surprised you lost your Solaris job.
You obviously didn't know what you were doing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30542704</id>
	<title>Re:Solaris? Give me a break.</title>
	<author>Golthar</author>
	<datestamp>1261651080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sun has made great  strides in making OpenSolaris just work, try the latest releases</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sun has made great strides in making OpenSolaris just work , try the latest releases</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sun has made great  strides in making OpenSolaris just work, try the latest releases</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525884</id>
	<title>GNU Hurd is not an OS</title>
	<author>Timothy Brownawell</author>
	<datestamp>1261508160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any more than Linux by itself is. It's <em>half</em> an OS.</p><p>Or really, a quarter of an OS because it won't be finished until the Second Coming of RMS to lead the faithful out of a world where all hardware (even your toaster) will only run software approved by the MPAA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any more than Linux by itself is .
It 's half an OS.Or really , a quarter of an OS because it wo n't be finished until the Second Coming of RMS to lead the faithful out of a world where all hardware ( even your toaster ) will only run software approved by the MPAA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any more than Linux by itself is.
It's half an OS.Or really, a quarter of an OS because it won't be finished until the Second Coming of RMS to lead the faithful out of a world where all hardware (even your toaster) will only run software approved by the MPAA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526218</id>
	<title>Re:GNU Hurd is not an OS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261509540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, the complete OS is GNU GNU/Hurd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , the complete OS is GNU GNU/Hurd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, the complete OS is GNU GNU/Hurd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530352</id>
	<title>Re:What a total waste of time</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1261482360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree - opinion at best, flamebait at worst. It probably made the front page because it praises OS X and the Iphone, whilst criticising Vista and Windows Mobile...</p><p>I agree about no research, he even thinks that "Symbian" (which he seems to think is a company) was "stopped in their tracks" by the Iphone, which he thinks is the winner(!)</p><p>As someone else points out, this isn't even an actual columnist - it's just a random blog, and by the looks of it anyone can sign up. Check out his not-very-active profile: <a href="http://www.itworld.com/tomhenderson" title="itworld.com">http://www.itworld.com/tomhenderson</a> [itworld.com] .</p><p>What next? Are opinion pieces on Slashdot journal entries going to start appearing on the front page?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree - opinion at best , flamebait at worst .
It probably made the front page because it praises OS X and the Iphone , whilst criticising Vista and Windows Mobile...I agree about no research , he even thinks that " Symbian " ( which he seems to think is a company ) was " stopped in their tracks " by the Iphone , which he thinks is the winner ( !
) As someone else points out , this is n't even an actual columnist - it 's just a random blog , and by the looks of it anyone can sign up .
Check out his not-very-active profile : http : //www.itworld.com/tomhenderson [ itworld.com ] .What next ?
Are opinion pieces on Slashdot journal entries going to start appearing on the front page ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree - opinion at best, flamebait at worst.
It probably made the front page because it praises OS X and the Iphone, whilst criticising Vista and Windows Mobile...I agree about no research, he even thinks that "Symbian" (which he seems to think is a company) was "stopped in their tracks" by the Iphone, which he thinks is the winner(!
)As someone else points out, this isn't even an actual columnist - it's just a random blog, and by the looks of it anyone can sign up.
Check out his not-very-active profile: http://www.itworld.com/tomhenderson [itworld.com] .What next?
Are opinion pieces on Slashdot journal entries going to start appearing on the front page?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525838</id>
	<title>So you don't have to waste your time</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1261507920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A tiny, three-page article, with each page only having three to four paragraphs, and the list has exactly what you'd expect it to have.  You really don't have to RTFA this time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A tiny , three-page article , with each page only having three to four paragraphs , and the list has exactly what you 'd expect it to have .
You really do n't have to RTFA this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A tiny, three-page article, with each page only having three to four paragraphs, and the list has exactly what you'd expect it to have.
You really don't have to RTFA this time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528984</id>
	<title>Where's Ubuntu?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261476360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there's one OS I can think of besides OSX that has made significant strides this past decade, it would be Ubuntu without question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there 's one OS I can think of besides OSX that has made significant strides this past decade , it would be Ubuntu without question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there's one OS I can think of besides OSX that has made significant strides this past decade, it would be Ubuntu without question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526362</id>
	<title>Re:IMHO solaris has a really bad userland</title>
	<author>RubberDuckie</author>
	<datestamp>1261510200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True enough, the Solaris userland is not as robust as Linux out of the box.  You can upgrade to a more robust userland through sites like Blastwave, that carry pre-compiled GNU-like programs.</p><p>OTOH, Solaris is much better at backward compatibility than Linux.  I have a very old proprietary database that was once running on Solaris 2.6, running on Solaris 10.  I didn't have to wedge in some ancient libc to get this to happen, it just worked.  So like many things in life, and especially with computers, you trade have trade offs: stability or newer features.  One size does not fit all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True enough , the Solaris userland is not as robust as Linux out of the box .
You can upgrade to a more robust userland through sites like Blastwave , that carry pre-compiled GNU-like programs.OTOH , Solaris is much better at backward compatibility than Linux .
I have a very old proprietary database that was once running on Solaris 2.6 , running on Solaris 10 .
I did n't have to wedge in some ancient libc to get this to happen , it just worked .
So like many things in life , and especially with computers , you trade have trade offs : stability or newer features .
One size does not fit all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True enough, the Solaris userland is not as robust as Linux out of the box.
You can upgrade to a more robust userland through sites like Blastwave, that carry pre-compiled GNU-like programs.OTOH, Solaris is much better at backward compatibility than Linux.
I have a very old proprietary database that was once running on Solaris 2.6, running on Solaris 10.
I didn't have to wedge in some ancient libc to get this to happen, it just worked.
So like many things in life, and especially with computers, you trade have trade offs: stability or newer features.
One size does not fit all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527046</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>Wowsers</author>
	<datestamp>1261512540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I missed the DOS box so much I installed Linux, where I could use it's equivalent Bash.</p><p>(not a flame post, meant as a joke)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I missed the DOS box so much I installed Linux , where I could use it 's equivalent Bash .
( not a flame post , meant as a joke )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I missed the DOS box so much I installed Linux, where I could use it's equivalent Bash.
(not a flame post, meant as a joke)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525932</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525932</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261508340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Included what in Vista? There is no DOS. The "dos window" is a command line dialog, not a real DOS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Included what in Vista ?
There is no DOS .
The " dos window " is a command line dialog , not a real DOS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Included what in Vista?
There is no DOS.
The "dos window" is a command line dialog, not a real DOS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528210</id>
	<title>Re:So you don't have to waste your time</title>
	<author>blai</author>
	<datestamp>1261473180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(the) GNU-rewritten Unix utilities toolset were invented by, through the purity / effort of Richard Stallman -- the pillar of free software.</p></div><p>Mr.Tom Henderson hates punctuation like he hates Windows ME.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( the ) GNU-rewritten Unix utilities toolset were invented by , through the purity / effort of Richard Stallman -- the pillar of free software.Mr.Tom Henderson hates punctuation like he hates Windows ME .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(the) GNU-rewritten Unix utilities toolset were invented by, through the purity / effort of Richard Stallman -- the pillar of free software.Mr.Tom Henderson hates punctuation like he hates Windows ME.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526000</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526180</id>
	<title>Re:BeOS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261509420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I still miss it. So much potential and such high hopes. I suppose I should check out Haiku.</p></div><p>Checking out Haiku is going to be like resurrecting your dead mother.  Her soul is gone and she'll just try to eat your brains.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still miss it .
So much potential and such high hopes .
I suppose I should check out Haiku.Checking out Haiku is going to be like resurrecting your dead mother .
Her soul is gone and she 'll just try to eat your brains .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still miss it.
So much potential and such high hopes.
I suppose I should check out Haiku.Checking out Haiku is going to be like resurrecting your dead mother.
Her soul is gone and she'll just try to eat your brains.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531150</id>
	<title>Re:What a total waste of time</title>
	<author>quickOnTheUptake</author>
	<datestamp>1261487040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah he seems kinda confused, e.g., <p><div class="quote"><p> Microsoft released it as a stop gap version to address slightly more memory and disk before the two Windows code bases would be merged together into Windows 2000</p></div><p> Win Me was released \_after\_ 2k (according to Wikipedia, 7 months after). When 2k was released, I remember MS warning home users to wait until Me came out.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah he seems kinda confused , e.g. , Microsoft released it as a stop gap version to address slightly more memory and disk before the two Windows code bases would be merged together into Windows 2000 Win Me was released \ _after \ _ 2k ( according to Wikipedia , 7 months after ) .
When 2k was released , I remember MS warning home users to wait until Me came out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah he seems kinda confused, e.g.,  Microsoft released it as a stop gap version to address slightly more memory and disk before the two Windows code bases would be merged together into Windows 2000 Win Me was released \_after\_ 2k (according to Wikipedia, 7 months after).
When 2k was released, I remember MS warning home users to wait until Me came out.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529614</id>
	<title>Re:Bashing WinMe instead of Win98 is clueless</title>
	<author>swordgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1261479000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) Oh yeah. "faster boot" into a desktop which doesn't actually respond until the underpinnings are loaded is a trick that MS first really exploited in ME, and continues to the present. Of course, it genuinely \_was\_ faster at booting because it didn't have real-mode DOS! Goodbye old software.<br>2) Fewer IE buttons than 98? Um...no.<br>3) Comes with a lot of crapware.<br>4) System Restore was so broken for almost a year that people learned to avoid it. When fixed, it was a clunky rollback model that never worked well.<br>5) These files were no longer executed because they were needed for real-mode DOS - which it dropped.<br>6) Well 98SE may not have had general midi emulation, but you didn't need it to run DOS programs in real-mode DOS.<br>7) Microsoft/x86 power management has NEVER been good enough to bother with. Faster doesn't mean anything if it didn't work right!</p><p>Which is the real problem with ME. It was slower to use than 98SE on all but the newest computers in its day, it threw away backwards compatibility without providing sufficiently accurate DOS emulation, The new features were clunky and poorly designed, and it was unstable as hell. It crashed more than any version of Windows since 3.0, and had a much greater tendency to corrupt data than its predecessors, or than anything in the NT development stream.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Oh yeah .
" faster boot " into a desktop which does n't actually respond until the underpinnings are loaded is a trick that MS first really exploited in ME , and continues to the present .
Of course , it genuinely \ _was \ _ faster at booting because it did n't have real-mode DOS !
Goodbye old software.2 ) Fewer IE buttons than 98 ?
Um...no.3 ) Comes with a lot of crapware.4 ) System Restore was so broken for almost a year that people learned to avoid it .
When fixed , it was a clunky rollback model that never worked well.5 ) These files were no longer executed because they were needed for real-mode DOS - which it dropped.6 ) Well 98SE may not have had general midi emulation , but you did n't need it to run DOS programs in real-mode DOS.7 ) Microsoft/x86 power management has NEVER been good enough to bother with .
Faster does n't mean anything if it did n't work right ! Which is the real problem with ME .
It was slower to use than 98SE on all but the newest computers in its day , it threw away backwards compatibility without providing sufficiently accurate DOS emulation , The new features were clunky and poorly designed , and it was unstable as hell .
It crashed more than any version of Windows since 3.0 , and had a much greater tendency to corrupt data than its predecessors , or than anything in the NT development stream .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Oh yeah.
"faster boot" into a desktop which doesn't actually respond until the underpinnings are loaded is a trick that MS first really exploited in ME, and continues to the present.
Of course, it genuinely \_was\_ faster at booting because it didn't have real-mode DOS!
Goodbye old software.2) Fewer IE buttons than 98?
Um...no.3) Comes with a lot of crapware.4) System Restore was so broken for almost a year that people learned to avoid it.
When fixed, it was a clunky rollback model that never worked well.5) These files were no longer executed because they were needed for real-mode DOS - which it dropped.6) Well 98SE may not have had general midi emulation, but you didn't need it to run DOS programs in real-mode DOS.7) Microsoft/x86 power management has NEVER been good enough to bother with.
Faster doesn't mean anything if it didn't work right!Which is the real problem with ME.
It was slower to use than 98SE on all but the newest computers in its day, it threw away backwards compatibility without providing sufficiently accurate DOS emulation, The new features were clunky and poorly designed, and it was unstable as hell.
It crashed more than any version of Windows since 3.0, and had a much greater tendency to corrupt data than its predecessors, or than anything in the NT development stream.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525956</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>Dunx</author>
	<datestamp>1261508460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More RAM, yes, but also direct access to hardware resources, and predictable response times (a lot of the same reasons that made DOS a reasonable basis for embedded PC systems).</p><p>OTOH, DOS barely counted as an operating system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More RAM , yes , but also direct access to hardware resources , and predictable response times ( a lot of the same reasons that made DOS a reasonable basis for embedded PC systems ) .OTOH , DOS barely counted as an operating system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More RAM, yes, but also direct access to hardware resources, and predictable response times (a lot of the same reasons that made DOS a reasonable basis for embedded PC systems).OTOH, DOS barely counted as an operating system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528924</id>
	<title>Hurd is "..of the decade"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261476240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hurd <em>can't</em> be best/worst of the decade, because this isn't 1999.  Hurd is <em>dead.</em></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hurd ca n't be best/worst of the decade , because this is n't 1999 .
Hurd is dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hurd can't be best/worst of the decade, because this isn't 1999.
Hurd is dead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531266</id>
	<title>Re:WTB: Editors?</title>
	<author>GrahamCox</author>
	<datestamp>1261488000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i> since when did they let just anybody post something on the interwebs?</i> <br> <br>
Since it was invented, really. Isn't that the point?</htmltext>
<tokenext>since when did they let just anybody post something on the interwebs ?
Since it was invented , really .
Is n't that the point ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> since when did they let just anybody post something on the interwebs?
Since it was invented, really.
Isn't that the point?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30534664</id>
	<title>Re:Solaris? Give me a break.</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1259765940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree that slowlaris is terrible, but Microsoft DOES indeed charge for hotfixes; they charge for ALL support access, and they only provide some hotfixes through support. It's not as bad as having to pay for all patches, though. I've administered versions of Solaris and IRIX whose install was smaller than their [eventual] patch set, so maybe they're just trying to pay for their bandwidth...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree that slowlaris is terrible , but Microsoft DOES indeed charge for hotfixes ; they charge for ALL support access , and they only provide some hotfixes through support .
It 's not as bad as having to pay for all patches , though .
I 've administered versions of Solaris and IRIX whose install was smaller than their [ eventual ] patch set , so maybe they 're just trying to pay for their bandwidth.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree that slowlaris is terrible, but Microsoft DOES indeed charge for hotfixes; they charge for ALL support access, and they only provide some hotfixes through support.
It's not as bad as having to pay for all patches, though.
I've administered versions of Solaris and IRIX whose install was smaller than their [eventual] patch set, so maybe they're just trying to pay for their bandwidth...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526746</id>
	<title>This just in!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261511460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Timothy was just named as the ugliest basement-dwelling-soda-swilling code monkey of the decade. Way to pick those articles there. Yu0 r t3h fa1lz0r5....moron!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Timothy was just named as the ugliest basement-dwelling-soda-swilling code monkey of the decade .
Way to pick those articles there .
Yu0 r t3h fa1lz0r5....moron !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Timothy was just named as the ugliest basement-dwelling-soda-swilling code monkey of the decade.
Way to pick those articles there.
Yu0 r t3h fa1lz0r5....moron!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526158</id>
	<title>In related news</title>
	<author>Icegryphon</author>
	<datestamp>1261509300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FreeBSD was unavailable for comment.<br>
Friend of FreeBSD, Netcraft is reporting that he is dead.<br>
As of yet this rumor is still unconfirmed.<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr><a href="http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/donate/" title="freebsdfoundation.org">;\_;</a> [freebsdfoundation.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>FreeBSD was unavailable for comment .
Friend of FreeBSD , Netcraft is reporting that he is dead .
As of yet this rumor is still unconfirmed .
; \ _ ; [ freebsdfoundation.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FreeBSD was unavailable for comment.
Friend of FreeBSD, Netcraft is reporting that he is dead.
As of yet this rumor is still unconfirmed.
;\_; [freebsdfoundation.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30535918</id>
	<title>Re:IMHO solaris has a really bad userland</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1259774040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, it's polluted with nonstandard Sun extensions.  The difference is, the nonstandard GNU extensions are marginally less hideous, although I still prefer the nonstandard FreeBSD extensions (which are similar, but not identical to, the nonstandard NetBSD and OpenBSD extensions).  If you've ever used a system that implements the Single UNIX Specification and nothing else you'd know that nonstandard extensions are the only thing that make life tolerable on a UNIX system.  The standard stuff is a core that lets you find your way around an unfamiliar system, but it's not particularly user friendly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it 's polluted with nonstandard Sun extensions .
The difference is , the nonstandard GNU extensions are marginally less hideous , although I still prefer the nonstandard FreeBSD extensions ( which are similar , but not identical to , the nonstandard NetBSD and OpenBSD extensions ) .
If you 've ever used a system that implements the Single UNIX Specification and nothing else you 'd know that nonstandard extensions are the only thing that make life tolerable on a UNIX system .
The standard stuff is a core that lets you find your way around an unfamiliar system , but it 's not particularly user friendly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it's polluted with nonstandard Sun extensions.
The difference is, the nonstandard GNU extensions are marginally less hideous, although I still prefer the nonstandard FreeBSD extensions (which are similar, but not identical to, the nonstandard NetBSD and OpenBSD extensions).
If you've ever used a system that implements the Single UNIX Specification and nothing else you'd know that nonstandard extensions are the only thing that make life tolerable on a UNIX system.
The standard stuff is a core that lets you find your way around an unfamiliar system, but it's not particularly user friendly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527316</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>dzfoo</author>
	<datestamp>1261513560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dude, check out DosBox, and for full immersion, set it to full screen.  No re-boot needed!  And for old Windows games, you can install Win3.11 easily!</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , check out DosBox , and for full immersion , set it to full screen .
No re-boot needed !
And for old Windows games , you can install Win3.11 easily !
        -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, check out DosBox, and for full immersion, set it to full screen.
No re-boot needed!
And for old Windows games, you can install Win3.11 easily!
        -dZ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526756</id>
	<title>Bashing WinMe instead of Win98 is clueless</title>
	<author>Antiocheian</author>
	<datestamp>1261511520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had tested both systems as candidates to install on friends who demanded Windows, and Windows Me was better:</p><p>1) Boots faster. It has the fastest boot than any other 32bit Microsoft OS.<br>2) Better interface, less internet explorer buttons on explorer (though still aparent)<br>3) Comes with a lot of crapware which could be easily be avoided on installation or after installation (98lite etc)<br>4) System Restore, once Microsoft patched it a few months later, was a nice addition to people having kids messing with the family computer<br>5) Config.sys and autoexec.bat instructions were no longer executed (save for a few system variable settings) which is a good thing<br>6) Provided General Midi emulation even in a DOS emulated window. You could play DOS games with general midi music.<br>7) Hibernation, much faster to Windows 2000.</p><p>All in all, Me was a good improvement to Windows 98 although I would still prefer Windows 95 as my system for its freedom from IE. However, anyone bashing Windows Me instead of Windows 98 is simply clueless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had tested both systems as candidates to install on friends who demanded Windows , and Windows Me was better : 1 ) Boots faster .
It has the fastest boot than any other 32bit Microsoft OS.2 ) Better interface , less internet explorer buttons on explorer ( though still aparent ) 3 ) Comes with a lot of crapware which could be easily be avoided on installation or after installation ( 98lite etc ) 4 ) System Restore , once Microsoft patched it a few months later , was a nice addition to people having kids messing with the family computer5 ) Config.sys and autoexec.bat instructions were no longer executed ( save for a few system variable settings ) which is a good thing6 ) Provided General Midi emulation even in a DOS emulated window .
You could play DOS games with general midi music.7 ) Hibernation , much faster to Windows 2000.All in all , Me was a good improvement to Windows 98 although I would still prefer Windows 95 as my system for its freedom from IE .
However , anyone bashing Windows Me instead of Windows 98 is simply clueless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had tested both systems as candidates to install on friends who demanded Windows, and Windows Me was better:1) Boots faster.
It has the fastest boot than any other 32bit Microsoft OS.2) Better interface, less internet explorer buttons on explorer (though still aparent)3) Comes with a lot of crapware which could be easily be avoided on installation or after installation (98lite etc)4) System Restore, once Microsoft patched it a few months later, was a nice addition to people having kids messing with the family computer5) Config.sys and autoexec.bat instructions were no longer executed (save for a few system variable settings) which is a good thing6) Provided General Midi emulation even in a DOS emulated window.
You could play DOS games with general midi music.7) Hibernation, much faster to Windows 2000.All in all, Me was a good improvement to Windows 98 although I would still prefer Windows 95 as my system for its freedom from IE.
However, anyone bashing Windows Me instead of Windows 98 is simply clueless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30535568</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>pak9rabid</author>
	<datestamp>1259771640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I admit that the fiddling was part of the fun of those old games.</p></div><p>Modem init strings anyone?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I admit that the fiddling was part of the fun of those old games.Modem init strings anyone ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I admit that the fiddling was part of the fun of those old games.Modem init strings anyone?
;)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531778</id>
	<title>Shitty Article is Shitty</title>
	<author>darthdavid</author>
	<datestamp>1261492920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That was one of the shittiest articles I've had the displeasure of reading in a while. Every sentence had about 8 adjectives in it and at least half of them were misspelled, misused or made up...</htmltext>
<tokenext>That was one of the shittiest articles I 've had the displeasure of reading in a while .
Every sentence had about 8 adjectives in it and at least half of them were misspelled , misused or made up.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was one of the shittiest articles I've had the displeasure of reading in a while.
Every sentence had about 8 adjectives in it and at least half of them were misspelled, misused or made up...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525866</id>
	<title>Emacs</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1261508040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The original parasitic OS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The original parasitic OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original parasitic OS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526582</id>
	<title>Re:GNU Hurd is not an OS</title>
	<author>LaminatorX</author>
	<datestamp>1261510920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't be silly.  The MPAA would never approve of NetBSD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't be silly .
The MPAA would never approve of NetBSD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't be silly.
The MPAA would never approve of NetBSD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526268</id>
	<title>Re:What a total waste of time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261509840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gosh, I wonder if submitter "itwbennett" is in any way related to the article website, IT World.  Move along, just another rag that has successfully trolled timothy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gosh , I wonder if submitter " itwbennett " is in any way related to the article website , IT World .
Move along , just another rag that has successfully trolled timothy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gosh, I wonder if submitter "itwbennett" is in any way related to the article website, IT World.
Move along, just another rag that has successfully trolled timothy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531122</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261486920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The default fedora colour scheme is nice, just a pity the rest of it sucks worse than Ubuntu, whose default colour scheme was dreamed up by someone who thought they could actually market shit to the masses.</p><p>Oh right! It's coffee-coloured, sure, that's what everyone thinks of first when they see brown....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The default fedora colour scheme is nice , just a pity the rest of it sucks worse than Ubuntu , whose default colour scheme was dreamed up by someone who thought they could actually market shit to the masses.Oh right !
It 's coffee-coloured , sure , that 's what everyone thinks of first when they see brown... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The default fedora colour scheme is nice, just a pity the rest of it sucks worse than Ubuntu, whose default colour scheme was dreamed up by someone who thought they could actually market shit to the masses.Oh right!
It's coffee-coloured, sure, that's what everyone thinks of first when they see brown....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526526</id>
	<title>Re:What a total waste of time</title>
	<author>Xtifr</author>
	<datestamp>1261510680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>TFA is a waste of time. It's the worse kind of drivel and doesn't have any interesting technical facts or points.</p></div><p>Yay!  My habit of never reading TFA is paying off big time!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA is a waste of time .
It 's the worse kind of drivel and does n't have any interesting technical facts or points.Yay !
My habit of never reading TFA is paying off big time !
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA is a waste of time.
It's the worse kind of drivel and doesn't have any interesting technical facts or points.Yay!
My habit of never reading TFA is paying off big time!
;)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525918</id>
	<title>uh, what?</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1261508280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>GNU rewritten Unix utilities tool set were invented by through the purity in effort of Richard Stallman</p></div><p>Why did the author feel the need to run his text through a Chinese translator then back to English?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>GNU rewritten Unix utilities tool set were invented by through the purity in effort of Richard StallmanWhy did the author feel the need to run his text through a Chinese translator then back to English ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GNU rewritten Unix utilities tool set were invented by through the purity in effort of Richard StallmanWhy did the author feel the need to run his text through a Chinese translator then back to English?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098</id>
	<title>Is Solaris actually good?</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1261509060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honest question. Solaris seems similar but different enough from the Linux I'm used to to be interesting. What are its features that Linux lacks/doesn't implement as well? I'm not a file system geek, so what's so good about ZFS that I'm going to notice? Is it much slower than mainstream desktop Linux, or is it doing fine?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honest question .
Solaris seems similar but different enough from the Linux I 'm used to to be interesting .
What are its features that Linux lacks/does n't implement as well ?
I 'm not a file system geek , so what 's so good about ZFS that I 'm going to notice ?
Is it much slower than mainstream desktop Linux , or is it doing fine ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honest question.
Solaris seems similar but different enough from the Linux I'm used to to be interesting.
What are its features that Linux lacks/doesn't implement as well?
I'm not a file system geek, so what's so good about ZFS that I'm going to notice?
Is it much slower than mainstream desktop Linux, or is it doing fine?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526512</id>
	<title>Re:BeOS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261510680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, at least she's not gonna eat my eyes, that's just unreasonable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , at least she 's not gon na eat my eyes , that 's just unreasonable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, at least she's not gonna eat my eyes, that's just unreasonable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525806</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdoted already?</title>
	<author>illumastorm</author>
	<datestamp>1261507860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Still better than Windows ME.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Still better than Windows ME .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Still better than Windows ME.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527254</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261513320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linuxmint has a decent interface and ease of use. I don't rally care for their motto "from freedom came fagginess" but the system is hands down better than ubuntu.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linuxmint has a decent interface and ease of use .
I do n't rally care for their motto " from freedom came fagginess " but the system is hands down better than ubuntu .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linuxmint has a decent interface and ease of use.
I don't rally care for their motto "from freedom came fagginess" but the system is hands down better than ubuntu.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526084</id>
	<title>Andriod?</title>
	<author>roe-roe</author>
	<datestamp>1261509060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think Android has a lot of great possibilities, but putting it on the list of best OSes of the decade is similar to giving Obama the Nobel Peace Prize.  I'm not saying it doesn't deserve being on the list, I just think it is a bit premature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Android has a lot of great possibilities , but putting it on the list of best OSes of the decade is similar to giving Obama the Nobel Peace Prize .
I 'm not saying it does n't deserve being on the list , I just think it is a bit premature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Android has a lot of great possibilities, but putting it on the list of best OSes of the decade is similar to giving Obama the Nobel Peace Prize.
I'm not saying it doesn't deserve being on the list, I just think it is a bit premature.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526014</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>Bagels</author>
	<datestamp>1261508700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Simple fix: grab Dosbox.  It probably has better compatibility than your '95 based computer ever did, although I admit that the fiddling was part of the fun of those old games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple fix : grab Dosbox .
It probably has better compatibility than your '95 based computer ever did , although I admit that the fiddling was part of the fun of those old games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple fix: grab Dosbox.
It probably has better compatibility than your '95 based computer ever did, although I admit that the fiddling was part of the fun of those old games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530220</id>
	<title>Re:GNU Hurd is not an OS</title>
	<author>jasonq</author>
	<datestamp>1261481760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wow - who GNU?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wow - who GNU ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wow - who GNU?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526218</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526000</id>
	<title>Re:So you don't have to waste your time</title>
	<author>Rary</author>
	<datestamp>1261508700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And who writes this crap? Do they even proofread it? Seriously, try to parse this sentence:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>GNU rewritten Unix utilities tool set were invented by through the purity in effort of Richard Stallman-- the pillar of free software.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And who writes this crap ?
Do they even proofread it ?
Seriously , try to parse this sentence : GNU rewritten Unix utilities tool set were invented by through the purity in effort of Richard Stallman-- the pillar of free software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And who writes this crap?
Do they even proofread it?
Seriously, try to parse this sentence:GNU rewritten Unix utilities tool set were invented by through the purity in effort of Richard Stallman-- the pillar of free software.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526028</id>
	<title>Re:IMHO solaris has a really bad userland</title>
	<author>ivucica</author>
	<datestamp>1261508760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The one who thought packing CDE into Solaris for a few years is a good idea should be hanged. I still sometimes have nightmares about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The one who thought packing CDE into Solaris for a few years is a good idea should be hanged .
I still sometimes have nightmares about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The one who thought packing CDE into Solaris for a few years is a good idea should be hanged.
I still sometimes have nightmares about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526038</id>
	<title>Re:So you don't have to waste your time</title>
	<author>Dunx</author>
	<datestamp>1261508820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And the writing is redundant, terrible and repetitive:</p><p>"lack and dearth of appropriate hardware drivers"</p><p>Lack \_and\_ dearth? That's pretty bad. Just put the thesaurus down and step away from the keyboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And the writing is redundant , terrible and repetitive : " lack and dearth of appropriate hardware drivers " Lack \ _and \ _ dearth ?
That 's pretty bad .
Just put the thesaurus down and step away from the keyboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the writing is redundant, terrible and repetitive:"lack and dearth of appropriate hardware drivers"Lack \_and\_ dearth?
That's pretty bad.
Just put the thesaurus down and step away from the keyboard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525924</id>
	<title>WTB: Editors?</title>
	<author>yurtinus</author>
	<datestamp>1261508280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Has anybody RTFA'd yet? Most costliest... invented by through...
<br> <br>
God, since when did they let just anybody post something on the interwebs?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anybody RTFA 'd yet ?
Most costliest... invented by through.. . God , since when did they let just anybody post something on the interwebs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anybody RTFA'd yet?
Most costliest... invented by through...
 
God, since when did they let just anybody post something on the interwebs?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525948</id>
	<title>Re:IMHO solaris has a really bad userland</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1261508400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's why you rarely hear anyone say "This is the year of the Solaris desktop".</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why you rarely hear anyone say " This is the year of the Solaris desktop " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why you rarely hear anyone say "This is the year of the Solaris desktop".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530686</id>
	<title>Re:Crap Article</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1261484040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...and is laughing all the way to the bank with the ad impressions from  fanboys/haters.</p></div><p>True, but his business model seems to be working....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and is laughing all the way to the bank with the ad impressions from fanboys/haters.True , but his business model seems to be working... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and is laughing all the way to the bank with the ad impressions from  fanboys/haters.True, but his business model seems to be working....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531312</id>
	<title>QNX man - best there ever was</title>
	<author>terjeber</author>
	<datestamp>1261488480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>EOM</htmltext>
<tokenext>EOM</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EOM</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528708</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>mikael</author>
	<datestamp>1261475280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is 'dosbox' for Linux and Windows</p><p>Back in those days, all the high-end PC's (=200MHz) had for the user interface was the MS-DOS prompt. For office users, they would have to type 'win' in order to get Windows 3.1 to start, unless it was added to their autoboot.bat startup file. Windows 3.1 ran well enough to play games like Solitaire and Minefield but the latency of kernel function-calls would slow down any graphics-intensive application right down to unbearable speeds.</p><p>Running under DOS, every application could do more or less what it wanted with the video hardware through MS-DOS kernel calls (via interrupts) - change the hardware cursor, the character set, the screen resolution, and if the game wasn't accessing the PC speaker directly, the game would also talk directly to the sound drivers. You would be lucky if games did have support a mouse or a multi-player mode as each network device driver would have to be specifically programmed for.</p><p>There were all sorts of programming methods for rearranging the format of the bit-planes for EGA, VGA and SVGA video modes in order to boost rendering speeds, at least until bit-blitting became available at which time, Windows 95 came out and unified all the different audio, video and networking hardware drivers under a single set of API's, and which restored direct hardware access (DirectX). Even with this level of access, the odd multi-tasking application like E-mail was enough to slow down a game, so the XBOX was developed.</p><p>The equivalent in Linux is the SDL set of API's. There is also the Shockwave Flash API which supports flash games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is 'dosbox ' for Linux and WindowsBack in those days , all the high-end PC 's ( = 200MHz ) had for the user interface was the MS-DOS prompt .
For office users , they would have to type 'win ' in order to get Windows 3.1 to start , unless it was added to their autoboot.bat startup file .
Windows 3.1 ran well enough to play games like Solitaire and Minefield but the latency of kernel function-calls would slow down any graphics-intensive application right down to unbearable speeds.Running under DOS , every application could do more or less what it wanted with the video hardware through MS-DOS kernel calls ( via interrupts ) - change the hardware cursor , the character set , the screen resolution , and if the game was n't accessing the PC speaker directly , the game would also talk directly to the sound drivers .
You would be lucky if games did have support a mouse or a multi-player mode as each network device driver would have to be specifically programmed for.There were all sorts of programming methods for rearranging the format of the bit-planes for EGA , VGA and SVGA video modes in order to boost rendering speeds , at least until bit-blitting became available at which time , Windows 95 came out and unified all the different audio , video and networking hardware drivers under a single set of API 's , and which restored direct hardware access ( DirectX ) .
Even with this level of access , the odd multi-tasking application like E-mail was enough to slow down a game , so the XBOX was developed.The equivalent in Linux is the SDL set of API 's .
There is also the Shockwave Flash API which supports flash games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is 'dosbox' for Linux and WindowsBack in those days, all the high-end PC's (=200MHz) had for the user interface was the MS-DOS prompt.
For office users, they would have to type 'win' in order to get Windows 3.1 to start, unless it was added to their autoboot.bat startup file.
Windows 3.1 ran well enough to play games like Solitaire and Minefield but the latency of kernel function-calls would slow down any graphics-intensive application right down to unbearable speeds.Running under DOS, every application could do more or less what it wanted with the video hardware through MS-DOS kernel calls (via interrupts) - change the hardware cursor, the character set, the screen resolution, and if the game wasn't accessing the PC speaker directly, the game would also talk directly to the sound drivers.
You would be lucky if games did have support a mouse or a multi-player mode as each network device driver would have to be specifically programmed for.There were all sorts of programming methods for rearranging the format of the bit-planes for EGA, VGA and SVGA video modes in order to boost rendering speeds, at least until bit-blitting became available at which time, Windows 95 came out and unified all the different audio, video and networking hardware drivers under a single set of API's, and which restored direct hardware access (DirectX).
Even with this level of access, the odd multi-tasking application like E-mail was enough to slow down a game, so the XBOX was developed.The equivalent in Linux is the SDL set of API's.
There is also the Shockwave Flash API which supports flash games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527638</id>
	<title>What a crap article</title>
	<author>mustafap</author>
	<datestamp>1261514580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why the hell did this crap get on slashdot? Is this the quality of reporting we are to expect now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why the hell did this crap get on slashdot ?
Is this the quality of reporting we are to expect now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why the hell did this crap get on slashdot?
Is this the quality of reporting we are to expect now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526398</id>
	<title>Re:What a total waste of time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261510320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"the author research ANYTHING"</p><p>That stands alone. He also didn't proof read worth a damn.</p><p>Off the top of my head:</p><p>He mentions Windows Me, which he admits this was a 1990s OS, but claims is was merged into the Windows 2000 codebase. In actuality, it was a stop gap to keep home users from trying to upgrade to Windows 2000. In a sane world, this would have been the logical successor to Windows 98, but instead was the successor to Windows NT 4.0. 2000 was thus a business targeted OS and not actually meant for Joe User.</p><p>When he congratulates Solaris, he mentions that it has features not found in Windows, Linux, and BSD. Chiefly dTrace, ZFS, and Containers. FreeBSD has dTrace, ZFS, and Jails, which are much the same as "Containers". Even if semantically argued that Containers and Jails are not the same, they do serve much the same purpose, and the remaining two features are very present. Even Linux has a reimplementation of ZFS, called Btrfs, though the two are not compatible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" the author research ANYTHING " That stands alone .
He also did n't proof read worth a damn.Off the top of my head : He mentions Windows Me , which he admits this was a 1990s OS , but claims is was merged into the Windows 2000 codebase .
In actuality , it was a stop gap to keep home users from trying to upgrade to Windows 2000 .
In a sane world , this would have been the logical successor to Windows 98 , but instead was the successor to Windows NT 4.0 .
2000 was thus a business targeted OS and not actually meant for Joe User.When he congratulates Solaris , he mentions that it has features not found in Windows , Linux , and BSD .
Chiefly dTrace , ZFS , and Containers .
FreeBSD has dTrace , ZFS , and Jails , which are much the same as " Containers " .
Even if semantically argued that Containers and Jails are not the same , they do serve much the same purpose , and the remaining two features are very present .
Even Linux has a reimplementation of ZFS , called Btrfs , though the two are not compatible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"the author research ANYTHING"That stands alone.
He also didn't proof read worth a damn.Off the top of my head:He mentions Windows Me, which he admits this was a 1990s OS, but claims is was merged into the Windows 2000 codebase.
In actuality, it was a stop gap to keep home users from trying to upgrade to Windows 2000.
In a sane world, this would have been the logical successor to Windows 98, but instead was the successor to Windows NT 4.0.
2000 was thus a business targeted OS and not actually meant for Joe User.When he congratulates Solaris, he mentions that it has features not found in Windows, Linux, and BSD.
Chiefly dTrace, ZFS, and Containers.
FreeBSD has dTrace, ZFS, and Jails, which are much the same as "Containers".
Even if semantically argued that Containers and Jails are not the same, they do serve much the same purpose, and the remaining two features are very present.
Even Linux has a reimplementation of ZFS, called Btrfs, though the two are not compatible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532090</id>
	<title>Emacs...</title>
	<author>marciot</author>
	<datestamp>1261496580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why didn't it make the list?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why did n't it make the list ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why didn't it make the list?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526482</id>
	<title>Re:So you don't have to waste your time</title>
	<author>fucket</author>
	<datestamp>1261510560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try:

"Initially, it was boasted that Vista would be the most costliest-ever operating system to develop..."

"The world was looking for the joiner of Novell's time-honored and rock-solid NetWare network operating system to be joined fully to Linux."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try : " Initially , it was boasted that Vista would be the most costliest-ever operating system to develop... " " The world was looking for the joiner of Novell 's time-honored and rock-solid NetWare network operating system to be joined fully to Linux .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try:

"Initially, it was boasted that Vista would be the most costliest-ever operating system to develop..."

"The world was looking for the joiner of Novell's time-honored and rock-solid NetWare network operating system to be joined fully to Linux.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529146</id>
	<title>No other OS exist(ed)?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261476900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe it took me just as long to write this reply as it did the author to write his 'article'. We need to stop linking to fluff like that article, it's not worth our time. Sad what passes for 'journalism' now...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe it took me just as long to write this reply as it did the author to write his 'article' .
We need to stop linking to fluff like that article , it 's not worth our time .
Sad what passes for 'journalism ' now.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe it took me just as long to write this reply as it did the author to write his 'article'.
We need to stop linking to fluff like that article, it's not worth our time.
Sad what passes for 'journalism' now...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527052</id>
	<title>Re:like...WHATever, dood...</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1261512600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>WinME was horrible.  HUGE memory leaks.  Unstable.  It was a kludge on Win98SE to fill in for the (late) WinXP desktop.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WinME was horrible .
HUGE memory leaks .
Unstable. It was a kludge on Win98SE to fill in for the ( late ) WinXP desktop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WinME was horrible.
HUGE memory leaks.
Unstable.  It was a kludge on Win98SE to fill in for the (late) WinXP desktop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30533894</id>
	<title>Hurd is great</title>
	<author>SpaghettiPattern</author>
	<datestamp>1259753700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just the other week I downloaded the ISO, shoved it onto a USB disk, popped it into my notebook, clicked on "OK" when I was asked "Wanna do the Gnu?" and hey presto I was up and running.<br> <br>

All device drivers worked out of the box and even the GNU implementation of flash worked a charm. Now try that with Vista.<br> <br>

Not only that, but it magically knew I wanted to setup a DNS and a DHCP server and all user credentials were instantly available through LDAP. And ZFS, it had that too.<br> <br>

Now for the awesome kernel model loading. Don't need that really. I'm a man and I can concentrate on only one thing at the time. In fact I don't mind booting a new kernel every time I need some new module.<br> <br>

Finaly, in order to celebrate the good work done by FSF and the current benevolent nature of hardware producers, I went to my fav pr0n site, pointed to a flash-video and gave the old todger a thorough and exquisite yank. Orgasms with Hurd are so much better than with GNU/Linux.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just the other week I downloaded the ISO , shoved it onto a USB disk , popped it into my notebook , clicked on " OK " when I was asked " Wan na do the Gnu ?
" and hey presto I was up and running .
All device drivers worked out of the box and even the GNU implementation of flash worked a charm .
Now try that with Vista .
Not only that , but it magically knew I wanted to setup a DNS and a DHCP server and all user credentials were instantly available through LDAP .
And ZFS , it had that too .
Now for the awesome kernel model loading .
Do n't need that really .
I 'm a man and I can concentrate on only one thing at the time .
In fact I do n't mind booting a new kernel every time I need some new module .
Finaly , in order to celebrate the good work done by FSF and the current benevolent nature of hardware producers , I went to my fav pr0n site , pointed to a flash-video and gave the old todger a thorough and exquisite yank .
Orgasms with Hurd are so much better than with GNU/Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just the other week I downloaded the ISO, shoved it onto a USB disk, popped it into my notebook, clicked on "OK" when I was asked "Wanna do the Gnu?
" and hey presto I was up and running.
All device drivers worked out of the box and even the GNU implementation of flash worked a charm.
Now try that with Vista.
Not only that, but it magically knew I wanted to setup a DNS and a DHCP server and all user credentials were instantly available through LDAP.
And ZFS, it had that too.
Now for the awesome kernel model loading.
Don't need that really.
I'm a man and I can concentrate on only one thing at the time.
In fact I don't mind booting a new kernel every time I need some new module.
Finaly, in order to celebrate the good work done by FSF and the current benevolent nature of hardware producers, I went to my fav pr0n site, pointed to a flash-video and gave the old todger a thorough and exquisite yank.
Orgasms with Hurd are so much better than with GNU/Linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526752</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261511520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just get DosBox. Works like a charm and you don't need to add a bunch of backwards-compatible bloat into the OS. I play my old DOS games all the time under Vista or 7. Keep the crap out of the OS - applications are preferred over stuff "bolted on" to the OS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just get DosBox .
Works like a charm and you do n't need to add a bunch of backwards-compatible bloat into the OS .
I play my old DOS games all the time under Vista or 7 .
Keep the crap out of the OS - applications are preferred over stuff " bolted on " to the OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just get DosBox.
Works like a charm and you don't need to add a bunch of backwards-compatible bloat into the OS.
I play my old DOS games all the time under Vista or 7.
Keep the crap out of the OS - applications are preferred over stuff "bolted on" to the OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30534930</id>
	<title>Re:WTB: Editors?</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1259767740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>since when did they let just anybody post something on the interwebs?</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
You must be new here.
</p><p>
Signed, teh intarwebs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>since when did they let just anybody post something on the interwebs ?
You must be new here .
Signed , teh intarwebs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>since when did they let just anybody post something on the interwebs?
You must be new here.
Signed, teh intarwebs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532420</id>
	<title>Re:Crap Article</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1261501260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(months after the 10.0 beta was freely available btw)</p></div><p>I think it came out around the time of Mac OS X DP1.<br>
Yep remember the early days of Carbon (1999-2000)?<br>
As I remember, one of the first Carbon apps was AppleWorks 6.0.<br>
Mac OS 9.0 shipped with CarbonLib 1.0, BTW.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( months after the 10.0 beta was freely available btw ) I think it came out around the time of Mac OS X DP1 .
Yep remember the early days of Carbon ( 1999-2000 ) ?
As I remember , one of the first Carbon apps was AppleWorks 6.0 .
Mac OS 9.0 shipped with CarbonLib 1.0 , BTW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(months after the 10.0 beta was freely available btw)I think it came out around the time of Mac OS X DP1.
Yep remember the early days of Carbon (1999-2000)?
As I remember, one of the first Carbon apps was AppleWorks 6.0.
Mac OS 9.0 shipped with CarbonLib 1.0, BTW.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529688</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528102</id>
	<title>In what way is ANDROID "one of the best"?</title>
	<author>popo</author>
	<datestamp>1261472880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't a troll, but to be fair: Android remains utterly untested, and is suffering from weak adoption.</p><p>Let's not just hand accolades to the mighty GOOG, just because their track record thus far has been exemplary.   I'm still waiting to be wowed by Android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't a troll , but to be fair : Android remains utterly untested , and is suffering from weak adoption.Let 's not just hand accolades to the mighty GOOG , just because their track record thus far has been exemplary .
I 'm still waiting to be wowed by Android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't a troll, but to be fair: Android remains utterly untested, and is suffering from weak adoption.Let's not just hand accolades to the mighty GOOG, just because their track record thus far has been exemplary.
I'm still waiting to be wowed by Android.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526264</id>
	<title>Re:What a total waste of time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261509780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.  In the section on Android (which seems completely ignorant of the fact that Android is running atop Linux, so the entire category should have been subsumed into the previous) they can't even be bothered to spell OpenMoko correctly. "OpenMoku" -- really ITWorld?  Really?  You might as well just take everything remotely *NIXish, call it "Linux OS" and show how competent you really are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
In the section on Android ( which seems completely ignorant of the fact that Android is running atop Linux , so the entire category should have been subsumed into the previous ) they ca n't even be bothered to spell OpenMoko correctly .
" OpenMoku " -- really ITWorld ?
Really ? You might as well just take everything remotely * NIXish , call it " Linux OS " and show how competent you really are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
In the section on Android (which seems completely ignorant of the fact that Android is running atop Linux, so the entire category should have been subsumed into the previous) they can't even be bothered to spell OpenMoko correctly.
"OpenMoku" -- really ITWorld?
Really?  You might as well just take everything remotely *NIXish, call it "Linux OS" and show how competent you really are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531794</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261493100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Android is not an OS, it is a brand name.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Android is not an OS , it is a brand name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Android is not an OS, it is a brand name.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528482</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>amaupin</author>
	<datestamp>1261474260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It probably has better compatibility than your '95 based computer ever did, although I admit that the fiddling was part of the fun of those old games.</p></div><p>No, it wasn't.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It probably has better compatibility than your '95 based computer ever did , although I admit that the fiddling was part of the fun of those old games.No , it was n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It probably has better compatibility than your '95 based computer ever did, although I admit that the fiddling was part of the fun of those old games.No, it wasn't.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526804</id>
	<title>Re:Crap Article</title>
	<author>idiotnot</author>
	<datestamp>1261511640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>First they split Windows down to the Service Pack level,</i></p><p>Ignoring, too, that 2K8 is basically Vista, which they panned.  I've been running Vista for nearly three years now on a personal desktop.  Two blue screens.  One was due to RAM that went bad, the other was due to a buggy VMware driver.</p><p><i>but go on to say "all of OS X and all of Linux" are in the best? Really? OS X 10.0 was a dismal, WinME failure, for one.</i></p><p>Yeah, 10.0 was lousy.  10.1 was at least usable most of the time.  Until Finder crashed.  And you had to ssh back in and reboot it, because you couldn't re-launch Finder.  Oh, and the browser selection was wonderful with fully-Carbon IE, Netscape 4 running in Classic, or a very buggy non-native Mozilla port.  Furthermore, OS X doesn't run a BSD kernel;  it's Mach with a BSD subsystem running in kernel-space.  Many of the nifty things available in OS X are due to Mach, not BSD.</p><p><i>And then to throw in Android, which is also Linux?</i></p><p>But, but, but, it doesn't run X!!!1!  I guess all the other purpose-built linux devices would fall into that category?  My TomTom?  My STB when I had IPTV service?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First they split Windows down to the Service Pack level,Ignoring , too , that 2K8 is basically Vista , which they panned .
I 've been running Vista for nearly three years now on a personal desktop .
Two blue screens .
One was due to RAM that went bad , the other was due to a buggy VMware driver.but go on to say " all of OS X and all of Linux " are in the best ?
Really ? OS X 10.0 was a dismal , WinME failure , for one.Yeah , 10.0 was lousy .
10.1 was at least usable most of the time .
Until Finder crashed .
And you had to ssh back in and reboot it , because you could n't re-launch Finder .
Oh , and the browser selection was wonderful with fully-Carbon IE , Netscape 4 running in Classic , or a very buggy non-native Mozilla port .
Furthermore , OS X does n't run a BSD kernel ; it 's Mach with a BSD subsystem running in kernel-space .
Many of the nifty things available in OS X are due to Mach , not BSD.And then to throw in Android , which is also Linux ? But , but , but , it does n't run X ! ! ! 1 !
I guess all the other purpose-built linux devices would fall into that category ?
My TomTom ?
My STB when I had IPTV service ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First they split Windows down to the Service Pack level,Ignoring, too, that 2K8 is basically Vista, which they panned.
I've been running Vista for nearly three years now on a personal desktop.
Two blue screens.
One was due to RAM that went bad, the other was due to a buggy VMware driver.but go on to say "all of OS X and all of Linux" are in the best?
Really? OS X 10.0 was a dismal, WinME failure, for one.Yeah, 10.0 was lousy.
10.1 was at least usable most of the time.
Until Finder crashed.
And you had to ssh back in and reboot it, because you couldn't re-launch Finder.
Oh, and the browser selection was wonderful with fully-Carbon IE, Netscape 4 running in Classic, or a very buggy non-native Mozilla port.
Furthermore, OS X doesn't run a BSD kernel;  it's Mach with a BSD subsystem running in kernel-space.
Many of the nifty things available in OS X are due to Mach, not BSD.And then to throw in Android, which is also Linux?But, but, but, it doesn't run X!!!1!
I guess all the other purpose-built linux devices would fall into that category?
My TomTom?
My STB when I had IPTV service?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527172</id>
	<title>Re:uh, what?</title>
	<author>PCM2</author>
	<datestamp>1261513080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your post made me go back and read the article. And it's true -- this is one of the worst-written articles I have ever seen. Every paragraph is a mish-mosh of subject/verb confusion, mixed metaphors, redundant wording, run-ons, and just about every other mistake you could make. You cherry-picked the best example of the lot, but among other howlers we have:</p><ul> <li><ol><li>The world was looking for the joiner of Novell's time-honored and rock-solid NetWare network operating system to be joined fully to Linux.</li></ol><ol><li>Technically, it arrived late in the 1990's, but its inclusion here is to remember the pain of the name.</li></ol><ol><li>The love/hate relationship becomes anchored with deep emotions about the merits/detractions of the devices they use-- through the lenses of operating systems.</li></ol><ol><li>Even a leopard can change its spots, sometimes as scar tissue.</li></ol><ol><li>A natively 'jailbroken' open phone will test carrier promises to just deliver wireless pipe.</li></ol></li> </ul><p>Taken as a whole, TFA becomes a kind of demented poetry. Kudos to whatever maniac got it published.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your post made me go back and read the article .
And it 's true -- this is one of the worst-written articles I have ever seen .
Every paragraph is a mish-mosh of subject/verb confusion , mixed metaphors , redundant wording , run-ons , and just about every other mistake you could make .
You cherry-picked the best example of the lot , but among other howlers we have : The world was looking for the joiner of Novell 's time-honored and rock-solid NetWare network operating system to be joined fully to Linux.Technically , it arrived late in the 1990 's , but its inclusion here is to remember the pain of the name.The love/hate relationship becomes anchored with deep emotions about the merits/detractions of the devices they use-- through the lenses of operating systems.Even a leopard can change its spots , sometimes as scar tissue.A natively 'jailbroken ' open phone will test carrier promises to just deliver wireless pipe .
Taken as a whole , TFA becomes a kind of demented poetry .
Kudos to whatever maniac got it published .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your post made me go back and read the article.
And it's true -- this is one of the worst-written articles I have ever seen.
Every paragraph is a mish-mosh of subject/verb confusion, mixed metaphors, redundant wording, run-ons, and just about every other mistake you could make.
You cherry-picked the best example of the lot, but among other howlers we have: The world was looking for the joiner of Novell's time-honored and rock-solid NetWare network operating system to be joined fully to Linux.Technically, it arrived late in the 1990's, but its inclusion here is to remember the pain of the name.The love/hate relationship becomes anchored with deep emotions about the merits/detractions of the devices they use-- through the lenses of operating systems.Even a leopard can change its spots, sometimes as scar tissue.A natively 'jailbroken' open phone will test carrier promises to just deliver wireless pipe.
Taken as a whole, TFA becomes a kind of demented poetry.
Kudos to whatever maniac got it published.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826</id>
	<title>What a total waste of time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261507920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TFA is a waste of time.  It's the worse kind of drivel and doesn't have any interesting technical facts or points.</p><p>I mean if they had broken OS's down by functionality, design and architecture it might be worth some time but this strikes me as an article anyone with quarter a clue could write in about a half hour - I mean did the author research ANYTHING for this versus pull out general comments that are generally known.</p><p>Come on editors you gotta be able to do better than this!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA is a waste of time .
It 's the worse kind of drivel and does n't have any interesting technical facts or points.I mean if they had broken OS 's down by functionality , design and architecture it might be worth some time but this strikes me as an article anyone with quarter a clue could write in about a half hour - I mean did the author research ANYTHING for this versus pull out general comments that are generally known.Come on editors you got ta be able to do better than this !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA is a waste of time.
It's the worse kind of drivel and doesn't have any interesting technical facts or points.I mean if they had broken OS's down by functionality, design and architecture it might be worth some time but this strikes me as an article anyone with quarter a clue could write in about a half hour - I mean did the author research ANYTHING for this versus pull out general comments that are generally known.Come on editors you gotta be able to do better than this!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710</id>
	<title>IMHO solaris has a really bad userland</title>
	<author>daveb1</author>
	<datestamp>1261507440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IMHO solaris has a really bad userland..... horrible horrible os for users<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</htmltext>
<tokenext>IMHO solaris has a really bad userland..... horrible horrible os for users : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMHO solaris has a really bad userland..... horrible horrible os for users :P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526724</id>
	<title>Re:IMHO solaris has a really bad userland</title>
	<author>nxtw</author>
	<datestamp>1261511460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>IMHO solaris has a really bad userland..... horrible horrible os for users<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></div></blockquote><p>I would argue it's simply not polluted with nonstandard GNU extensions...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>IMHO solaris has a really bad userland..... horrible horrible os for users : PI would argue it 's simply not polluted with nonstandard GNU extensions.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMHO solaris has a really bad userland..... horrible horrible os for users :PI would argue it's simply not polluted with nonstandard GNU extensions...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527538</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261514280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fiddling was fun?  What perverse gulag do you live in?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fiddling was fun ?
What perverse gulag do you live in ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fiddling was fun?
What perverse gulag do you live in?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527872</id>
	<title>Why Android?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261515240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All I have to say is that the Android OS should be outlawed. Even Joe Six Pack or his grandmother can tell it's based on the shoddy shoulders of substandard Linux. I have many horror stories to share, most recently a case where I tried to impress the higher-ups at work. Figuring that going cutting edge would be a good idea I went ahead and replaced my accounting team's computers by installing Android on them. Lo and behold their accounting software wouldn't even work on the crappy OS! Before I had a chance to switch them back to good old Windows, the big boss came by and saw a whole staff of his people sitting on their hands with nothing to do. He got so mad he started yelling at me and I was on the verge of tears.</p><p>Trust me, that's the last time I ever stray away from a proven, roadtested OS such as Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All I have to say is that the Android OS should be outlawed .
Even Joe Six Pack or his grandmother can tell it 's based on the shoddy shoulders of substandard Linux .
I have many horror stories to share , most recently a case where I tried to impress the higher-ups at work .
Figuring that going cutting edge would be a good idea I went ahead and replaced my accounting team 's computers by installing Android on them .
Lo and behold their accounting software would n't even work on the crappy OS !
Before I had a chance to switch them back to good old Windows , the big boss came by and saw a whole staff of his people sitting on their hands with nothing to do .
He got so mad he started yelling at me and I was on the verge of tears.Trust me , that 's the last time I ever stray away from a proven , roadtested OS such as Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All I have to say is that the Android OS should be outlawed.
Even Joe Six Pack or his grandmother can tell it's based on the shoddy shoulders of substandard Linux.
I have many horror stories to share, most recently a case where I tried to impress the higher-ups at work.
Figuring that going cutting edge would be a good idea I went ahead and replaced my accounting team's computers by installing Android on them.
Lo and behold their accounting software wouldn't even work on the crappy OS!
Before I had a chance to switch them back to good old Windows, the big boss came by and saw a whole staff of his people sitting on their hands with nothing to do.
He got so mad he started yelling at me and I was on the verge of tears.Trust me, that's the last time I ever stray away from a proven, roadtested OS such as Windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768</id>
	<title>BeOS</title>
	<author>JesseL</author>
	<datestamp>1261507680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still miss it. So much potential and such high hopes. I suppose I should check out Haiku.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still miss it .
So much potential and such high hopes .
I suppose I should check out Haiku .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still miss it.
So much potential and such high hopes.
I suppose I should check out Haiku.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528060</id>
	<title>Re:Is Solaris actually good?</title>
	<author>gbarules2999</author>
	<datestamp>1261472640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Go try OpenSolaris on a LiveCD. It is worth your time, just to check the new stuff out. ZFS is very awesome indeed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Go try OpenSolaris on a LiveCD .
It is worth your time , just to check the new stuff out .
ZFS is very awesome indeed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go try OpenSolaris on a LiveCD.
It is worth your time, just to check the new stuff out.
ZFS is very awesome indeed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525868</id>
	<title>Windows bias</title>
	<author>1000101</author>
	<datestamp>1261508100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree with most of the article, but when people have attitudes such as "It's not easy to nominate them here as their business practices aren't very kind" (Windows Server 2008) I tend to take the article less seriously. The OS either holds up to the criteria of the article or it doesn't. Keep it at that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with most of the article , but when people have attitudes such as " It 's not easy to nominate them here as their business practices are n't very kind " ( Windows Server 2008 ) I tend to take the article less seriously .
The OS either holds up to the criteria of the article or it does n't .
Keep it at that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with most of the article, but when people have attitudes such as "It's not easy to nominate them here as their business practices aren't very kind" (Windows Server 2008) I tend to take the article less seriously.
The OS either holds up to the criteria of the article or it doesn't.
Keep it at that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525976</id>
	<title>Re:So you don't have to waste your time</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1261508520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You really don't have to RTFA this time.</p></div><p>Well that's a refreshing change from my usual Slashdot experience.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You really do n't have to RTFA this time.Well that 's a refreshing change from my usual Slashdot experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You really don't have to RTFA this time.Well that's a refreshing change from my usual Slashdot experience.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526570</id>
	<title>"Solaris/OpenSolaris 10" - Really?</title>
	<author>Zemplar</author>
	<datestamp>1261510860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's no such thing as "Solaris/OpenSolaris 10", however, Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris do actually exist and are indeed really awesome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no such thing as " Solaris/OpenSolaris 10 " , however , Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris do actually exist and are indeed really awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no such thing as "Solaris/OpenSolaris 10", however, Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris do actually exist and are indeed really awesome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532994</id>
	<title>2008 more secure?</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1261508940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/09/microsoft\_windows\_security\_bug/" title="theregister.co.uk" rel="nofollow">Hang or Remote code execution by a malformed packet to its file sharing service</a> [theregister.co.uk].  It ain't BSD.  If this is the result of a decade of emphasis on code security, Microsoft has got problems that aren't in their code, they're in their culture.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hang or Remote code execution by a malformed packet to its file sharing service [ theregister.co.uk ] .
It ai n't BSD .
If this is the result of a decade of emphasis on code security , Microsoft has got problems that are n't in their code , they 're in their culture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hang or Remote code execution by a malformed packet to its file sharing service [theregister.co.uk].
It ain't BSD.
If this is the result of a decade of emphasis on code security, Microsoft has got problems that aren't in their code, they're in their culture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530392</id>
	<title>Re:Bashing WinMe instead of Win98 is clueless</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1261482540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 98 wasn't released in this decade<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 98 was n't released in this decade ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 98 wasn't released in this decade ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527062</id>
	<title>Re:Is Solaris actually good?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261512660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ZFS is really awesome.  Sadly, it's saddled with a lot of painful baggage in the form of Solaris/*BSD, so it's a big balancing act between ZFS and everything else.</p><p>Why is ZFS awesome?  From an administration point of view, it makes managing large amounts of storage ridiculously easy.  I recently acquired a couple of secondhand Sunfire x4500s (aka "Thumper"), each of which has 48 250GB drives.  The next gen box (x4540, "Thor") has 48 2TB drives (!!).  I briefly considered using Linux with MD/LVM to manage all of this, but having done a lot with MD/LVM in the past I knew I was looking at a world of pain in terms of flexibility and ongoing maintenance.  I figured that all the ZFS fanboys might be onto something, so I grabbed OpenSolaris 2009.06 and threw it on there.</p><p>Ok, well, "threw it on there" is a bit of an oversimplification.  I'll spare you all the nonsense involved, some of which was due to ignorance on my part, some of which was due to the fact that the OpenSolaris people have inexplicably chosen to try and out-Ubuntu Ubuntu and make OpenSolaris a killer desktop OS or something.  There is no official text-based install, for example...  Great fun to install from 2500 miles away over SSH.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;P</p><p>To keep this simple, after all the pain of getting OpenSolaris installed and then experimenting with different layouts, I now have this:</p><p>root@host:~# zfs list tank<br>NAME   USED  AVAIL  REFER  MOUNTPOINT<br>tank   321G  7.68T  58.5K<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/tank</p><p>What can I do with it?  I can create new NFS shares:</p><p>root@host:~# zfs create -osharenfs=on tank/www</p><p>I can create volumes (block devices created from ZFS pools) and share via iSCSI:</p><p>root@host:~# zfs create -s -V16G -o shareiscsi=on tank/vol/build\_centos5.4-x86\_64</p><p>Every one of these new filesystems/volumes is automatically snapshotted on an hourly/daily/weekly/monthly basis, and the snapshots are available via NFS.  This is really awesome when it comes to home directories...</p><p>me@nfsclient:~$ ls -l<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.zfs/snapshot<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>drwxr-xr-x 54 me users 83 2009-12-22 06:56 zfs-auto-snap:hourly-2009-12-22-11:00</p><p>me@nfsclient:~$ ls -l<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.zfs/snapshot/zfs-auto-snap:hourly-2009-12-22-11:00/<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...my homedir contents from 11:00...</p><p>There's a lot of other stuff, but those are the high points.  Using OpenSolaris was worth the pain because of the way ZFS is integrated into the management framework.  I don't believe that NFS exports and iSCSI target mangement are integrated into ZFS on the BSD ports, but I could be wrong.</p><p>That's my experience.  True ZFS/Solaris zealots will go on and on about data integrity and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... ?  I dunno what else.  Compatibility with older releases?  Maybe with real Solaris, but OpenSolaris threw all that out anyhow.  I wouldn't recommend (Open)Solaris for small systems with a disk or two, unless you're the sort of person who jams tacks under your fingernails for fun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ZFS is really awesome .
Sadly , it 's saddled with a lot of painful baggage in the form of Solaris/ * BSD , so it 's a big balancing act between ZFS and everything else.Why is ZFS awesome ?
From an administration point of view , it makes managing large amounts of storage ridiculously easy .
I recently acquired a couple of secondhand Sunfire x4500s ( aka " Thumper " ) , each of which has 48 250GB drives .
The next gen box ( x4540 , " Thor " ) has 48 2TB drives ( ! ! ) .
I briefly considered using Linux with MD/LVM to manage all of this , but having done a lot with MD/LVM in the past I knew I was looking at a world of pain in terms of flexibility and ongoing maintenance .
I figured that all the ZFS fanboys might be onto something , so I grabbed OpenSolaris 2009.06 and threw it on there.Ok , well , " threw it on there " is a bit of an oversimplification .
I 'll spare you all the nonsense involved , some of which was due to ignorance on my part , some of which was due to the fact that the OpenSolaris people have inexplicably chosen to try and out-Ubuntu Ubuntu and make OpenSolaris a killer desktop OS or something .
There is no official text-based install , for example... Great fun to install from 2500 miles away over SSH .
; PTo keep this simple , after all the pain of getting OpenSolaris installed and then experimenting with different layouts , I now have this : root @ host : ~ # zfs list tankNAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINTtank 321G 7.68T 58.5K /tankWhat can I do with it ?
I can create new NFS shares : root @ host : ~ # zfs create -osharenfs = on tank/wwwI can create volumes ( block devices created from ZFS pools ) and share via iSCSI : root @ host : ~ # zfs create -s -V16G -o shareiscsi = on tank/vol/build \ _centos5.4-x86 \ _64Every one of these new filesystems/volumes is automatically snapshotted on an hourly/daily/weekly/monthly basis , and the snapshots are available via NFS .
This is really awesome when it comes to home directories...me @ nfsclient : ~ $ ls -l .zfs/snapshot ...drwxr-xr-x 54 me users 83 2009-12-22 06 : 56 zfs-auto-snap : hourly-2009-12-22-11 : 00me @ nfsclient : ~ $ ls -l .zfs/snapshot/zfs-auto-snap : hourly-2009-12-22-11 : 00/ ...my homedir contents from 11 : 00...There 's a lot of other stuff , but those are the high points .
Using OpenSolaris was worth the pain because of the way ZFS is integrated into the management framework .
I do n't believe that NFS exports and iSCSI target mangement are integrated into ZFS on the BSD ports , but I could be wrong.That 's my experience .
True ZFS/Solaris zealots will go on and on about data integrity and ... ? I dunno what else .
Compatibility with older releases ?
Maybe with real Solaris , but OpenSolaris threw all that out anyhow .
I would n't recommend ( Open ) Solaris for small systems with a disk or two , unless you 're the sort of person who jams tacks under your fingernails for fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ZFS is really awesome.
Sadly, it's saddled with a lot of painful baggage in the form of Solaris/*BSD, so it's a big balancing act between ZFS and everything else.Why is ZFS awesome?
From an administration point of view, it makes managing large amounts of storage ridiculously easy.
I recently acquired a couple of secondhand Sunfire x4500s (aka "Thumper"), each of which has 48 250GB drives.
The next gen box (x4540, "Thor") has 48 2TB drives (!!).
I briefly considered using Linux with MD/LVM to manage all of this, but having done a lot with MD/LVM in the past I knew I was looking at a world of pain in terms of flexibility and ongoing maintenance.
I figured that all the ZFS fanboys might be onto something, so I grabbed OpenSolaris 2009.06 and threw it on there.Ok, well, "threw it on there" is a bit of an oversimplification.
I'll spare you all the nonsense involved, some of which was due to ignorance on my part, some of which was due to the fact that the OpenSolaris people have inexplicably chosen to try and out-Ubuntu Ubuntu and make OpenSolaris a killer desktop OS or something.
There is no official text-based install, for example...  Great fun to install from 2500 miles away over SSH.
;PTo keep this simple, after all the pain of getting OpenSolaris installed and then experimenting with different layouts, I now have this:root@host:~# zfs list tankNAME   USED  AVAIL  REFER  MOUNTPOINTtank   321G  7.68T  58.5K /tankWhat can I do with it?
I can create new NFS shares:root@host:~# zfs create -osharenfs=on tank/wwwI can create volumes (block devices created from ZFS pools) and share via iSCSI:root@host:~# zfs create -s -V16G -o shareiscsi=on tank/vol/build\_centos5.4-x86\_64Every one of these new filesystems/volumes is automatically snapshotted on an hourly/daily/weekly/monthly basis, and the snapshots are available via NFS.
This is really awesome when it comes to home directories...me@nfsclient:~$ ls -l .zfs/snapshot ...drwxr-xr-x 54 me users 83 2009-12-22 06:56 zfs-auto-snap:hourly-2009-12-22-11:00me@nfsclient:~$ ls -l .zfs/snapshot/zfs-auto-snap:hourly-2009-12-22-11:00/ ...my homedir contents from 11:00...There's a lot of other stuff, but those are the high points.
Using OpenSolaris was worth the pain because of the way ZFS is integrated into the management framework.
I don't believe that NFS exports and iSCSI target mangement are integrated into ZFS on the BSD ports, but I could be wrong.That's my experience.
True ZFS/Solaris zealots will go on and on about data integrity and ... ?  I dunno what else.
Compatibility with older releases?
Maybe with real Solaris, but OpenSolaris threw all that out anyhow.
I wouldn't recommend (Open)Solaris for small systems with a disk or two, unless you're the sort of person who jams tacks under your fingernails for fun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527472</id>
	<title>Re:Crap Article</title>
	<author>MakinBacon</author>
	<datestamp>1261514040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not even an article.   If you look at the author's profile, you'll find that this is a blog post by some guy who just opened up his account eight days ago.  I honestly can't believe that this somehow made it to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. front page.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not even an article .
If you look at the author 's profile , you 'll find that this is a blog post by some guy who just opened up his account eight days ago .
I honestly ca n't believe that this somehow made it to the / .
front page .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not even an article.
If you look at the author's profile, you'll find that this is a blog post by some guy who just opened up his account eight days ago.
I honestly can't believe that this somehow made it to the /.
front page.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30555288</id>
	<title>Re:BeOS</title>
	<author>2stein</author>
	<datestamp>1261834080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I suppose I should check out Haiku.</p></div><p>I really think you should! I've installed the alpha a few months ago (on a really crappy old system - 1GHz P3, 256MB RAM, slooooow (as in awfully slow) HDD) and it worked out surprisingly well. Boots (from Grub to responsive interface) in approx. 7 seconds on that old box, stays responsive all the time (even when running a few instances of that Teapot rendering w/o hardware acceleration), simply amazing. To say "it currently lacks a few application ports" would be understatement, but I fancy it a great single-user OS.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I suppose I should check out Haiku.I really think you should !
I 've installed the alpha a few months ago ( on a really crappy old system - 1GHz P3 , 256MB RAM , slooooow ( as in awfully slow ) HDD ) and it worked out surprisingly well .
Boots ( from Grub to responsive interface ) in approx .
7 seconds on that old box , stays responsive all the time ( even when running a few instances of that Teapot rendering w/o hardware acceleration ) , simply amazing .
To say " it currently lacks a few application ports " would be understatement , but I fancy it a great single-user OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suppose I should check out Haiku.I really think you should!
I've installed the alpha a few months ago (on a really crappy old system - 1GHz P3, 256MB RAM, slooooow (as in awfully slow) HDD) and it worked out surprisingly well.
Boots (from Grub to responsive interface) in approx.
7 seconds on that old box, stays responsive all the time (even when running a few instances of that Teapot rendering w/o hardware acceleration), simply amazing.
To say "it currently lacks a few application ports" would be understatement, but I fancy it a great single-user OS.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527098</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1261512720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dual boot to FreeDOS or DR-DOS.  Drivers are a problem sometimes with modern hardware; but, DOS still exists.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dual boot to FreeDOS or DR-DOS .
Drivers are a problem sometimes with modern hardware ; but , DOS still exists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dual boot to FreeDOS or DR-DOS.
Drivers are a problem sometimes with modern hardware; but, DOS still exists.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531282</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261488120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Best OS: Android IMHO it is more sophisticated than it's competitors.</p><p>Ugliest OS: $ANY\_LINUX\_DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one. I can make a linux pretty, but I'm talking about defaults. Often with some of the most amateurish desktop backgrounds. People make better art with MS Paint.</p></div><p>Excuse me, you are aware that android... is a Linux Distro. right?</p><p>Also ones background is potentially the MOST trivial thing to get caught up on, its not like vista's default background is beautiful. If you can even bring yourself to right click on your desktop and choose a new background then honestly you probably shouldn't be using a computer. Now a days one has to do a lot of that clicking stuff to use a computer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Best OS : Android IMHO it is more sophisticated than it 's competitors.Ugliest OS : $ ANY \ _LINUX \ _DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one .
I can make a linux pretty , but I 'm talking about defaults .
Often with some of the most amateurish desktop backgrounds .
People make better art with MS Paint.Excuse me , you are aware that android... is a Linux Distro .
right ? Also ones background is potentially the MOST trivial thing to get caught up on , its not like vista 's default background is beautiful .
If you can even bring yourself to right click on your desktop and choose a new background then honestly you probably should n't be using a computer .
Now a days one has to do a lot of that clicking stuff to use a computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Best OS: Android IMHO it is more sophisticated than it's competitors.Ugliest OS: $ANY\_LINUX\_DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one.
I can make a linux pretty, but I'm talking about defaults.
Often with some of the most amateurish desktop backgrounds.
People make better art with MS Paint.Excuse me, you are aware that android... is a Linux Distro.
right?Also ones background is potentially the MOST trivial thing to get caught up on, its not like vista's default background is beautiful.
If you can even bring yourself to right click on your desktop and choose a new background then honestly you probably shouldn't be using a computer.
Now a days one has to do a lot of that clicking stuff to use a computer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526600</id>
	<title>Re:like...WHATever, dood...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261510980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Vista gave the good admins the ability to have a completely safe computer.</p></div></blockquote><p>Since when were good admins running Windows on their own machines?</p><blockquote><div><p>WinME was the best of the 9x line</p></div></blockquote><p>I knew 1 person who struggled on with WinME, everybody else I knew back then ran (or quickly upgraded to) 2000 professional; even for home use.  What a ringing endorsement from the market for WinME!</p><p>Tom Henderson may be a moron but hardly indicative of slashdot...</p><blockquote><div><p>Linux adherents and Mac fanboys may cry foul, but Microsoft's latest server operating system (for all of its sole-source lock-ins) has the best in terms of enterprise federated security and authentication.</p></div></blockquote><p>Which dialog is a (MSHTML embedded) web page today?  I've found it to be a PITA but I run it as part of a small workgroup, legacy inhouse apps I migrated to a VM while we work on porting them to unix.  If I had to have a Windows workstation for any reason, I'd run Server 2008 but that doesn't change the fact that Windows is a POS OS.</p><p>OSX and linux are better desktop OS's than any version of Windows will ever be.  On the server... Windows remains a joke for anything other than basic workgroup functionality.  Like many slashdotters, I admin Windows XP, Server 08, OSX, and linux (as desktop and server) every working day.  When I say that Windows sucks, I'm in a position to know.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Vista gave the good admins the ability to have a completely safe computer.Since when were good admins running Windows on their own machines ? WinME was the best of the 9x lineI knew 1 person who struggled on with WinME , everybody else I knew back then ran ( or quickly upgraded to ) 2000 professional ; even for home use .
What a ringing endorsement from the market for WinME ! Tom Henderson may be a moron but hardly indicative of slashdot...Linux adherents and Mac fanboys may cry foul , but Microsoft 's latest server operating system ( for all of its sole-source lock-ins ) has the best in terms of enterprise federated security and authentication.Which dialog is a ( MSHTML embedded ) web page today ?
I 've found it to be a PITA but I run it as part of a small workgroup , legacy inhouse apps I migrated to a VM while we work on porting them to unix .
If I had to have a Windows workstation for any reason , I 'd run Server 2008 but that does n't change the fact that Windows is a POS OS.OSX and linux are better desktop OS 's than any version of Windows will ever be .
On the server... Windows remains a joke for anything other than basic workgroup functionality .
Like many slashdotters , I admin Windows XP , Server 08 , OSX , and linux ( as desktop and server ) every working day .
When I say that Windows sucks , I 'm in a position to know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vista gave the good admins the ability to have a completely safe computer.Since when were good admins running Windows on their own machines?WinME was the best of the 9x lineI knew 1 person who struggled on with WinME, everybody else I knew back then ran (or quickly upgraded to) 2000 professional; even for home use.
What a ringing endorsement from the market for WinME!Tom Henderson may be a moron but hardly indicative of slashdot...Linux adherents and Mac fanboys may cry foul, but Microsoft's latest server operating system (for all of its sole-source lock-ins) has the best in terms of enterprise federated security and authentication.Which dialog is a (MSHTML embedded) web page today?
I've found it to be a PITA but I run it as part of a small workgroup, legacy inhouse apps I migrated to a VM while we work on porting them to unix.
If I had to have a Windows workstation for any reason, I'd run Server 2008 but that doesn't change the fact that Windows is a POS OS.OSX and linux are better desktop OS's than any version of Windows will ever be.
On the server... Windows remains a joke for anything other than basic workgroup functionality.
Like many slashdotters, I admin Windows XP, Server 08, OSX, and linux (as desktop and server) every working day.
When I say that Windows sucks, I'm in a position to know.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532352</id>
	<title>Re:Solaris? Give me a break.</title>
	<author>blargster</author>
	<datestamp>1261500360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think that there are three distinct "universes" of OS: Desktop (and maybe phones now), Enterprise (support for the Desktop: Exchange, intranet web servers, etc.) and Production.</p><p>Solaris is for production and it serves that purpose very well indeed.  I think you'd be surprised at the percentage of Solaris use for production use by the Fortune 500 companies.  And nothing else is seriously considered except for HP-UX, Linux and AIX, at least at the company I work for (well over half, around 20,000 or so, are Solaris; Linux is in third at around 12\%).</p><p>I have used all of them and I like Solaris and Linux the most and I find them the most similar to one another by far.   HP-UX is very solid, also, but a little quirky.</p><p>AIX is the least standard of any Unix-like OS out there, IMO.  It is almost like IBM completely rethought Unix from the ground up, but at the cost of consistency with all other implementations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that there are three distinct " universes " of OS : Desktop ( and maybe phones now ) , Enterprise ( support for the Desktop : Exchange , intranet web servers , etc .
) and Production.Solaris is for production and it serves that purpose very well indeed .
I think you 'd be surprised at the percentage of Solaris use for production use by the Fortune 500 companies .
And nothing else is seriously considered except for HP-UX , Linux and AIX , at least at the company I work for ( well over half , around 20,000 or so , are Solaris ; Linux is in third at around 12 \ % ) .I have used all of them and I like Solaris and Linux the most and I find them the most similar to one another by far .
HP-UX is very solid , also , but a little quirky.AIX is the least standard of any Unix-like OS out there , IMO .
It is almost like IBM completely rethought Unix from the ground up , but at the cost of consistency with all other implementations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that there are three distinct "universes" of OS: Desktop (and maybe phones now), Enterprise (support for the Desktop: Exchange, intranet web servers, etc.
) and Production.Solaris is for production and it serves that purpose very well indeed.
I think you'd be surprised at the percentage of Solaris use for production use by the Fortune 500 companies.
And nothing else is seriously considered except for HP-UX, Linux and AIX, at least at the company I work for (well over half, around 20,000 or so, are Solaris; Linux is in third at around 12\%).I have used all of them and I like Solaris and Linux the most and I find them the most similar to one another by far.
HP-UX is very solid, also, but a little quirky.AIX is the least standard of any Unix-like OS out there, IMO.
It is almost like IBM completely rethought Unix from the ground up, but at the cost of consistency with all other implementations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529082</id>
	<title>Roland</title>
	<author>sxltrex</author>
	<datestamp>1261476660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And somewhere Roland Piquepaille is smiling.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And somewhere Roland Piquepaille is smiling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And somewhere Roland Piquepaille is smiling.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30542122</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>the\_womble</author>
	<datestamp>1259780880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ugliest OS: $ANY\_LINUX\_DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one.</p></div><p>Mandriva 2010 KDE</p><p><a href="http://www2.mandriva.com/linux/overview/" title="mandriva.com">http://www2.mandriva.com/linux/overview/</a> [mandriva.com]</p><p>In addition, the Mandriva Control Centre is very good, the community is friendly, multiple desktop environments are properly supported (no Kubuntu style underfunded support), the repos are fairly big (but smaller than Debian/Ubuntu) and bug fixes usually happen fast.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ugliest OS : $ ANY \ _LINUX \ _DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one.Mandriva 2010 KDEhttp : //www2.mandriva.com/linux/overview/ [ mandriva.com ] In addition , the Mandriva Control Centre is very good , the community is friendly , multiple desktop environments are properly supported ( no Kubuntu style underfunded support ) , the repos are fairly big ( but smaller than Debian/Ubuntu ) and bug fixes usually happen fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ugliest OS: $ANY\_LINUX\_DISTRO Seriously show me a pretty one.Mandriva 2010 KDEhttp://www2.mandriva.com/linux/overview/ [mandriva.com]In addition, the Mandriva Control Centre is very good, the community is friendly, multiple desktop environments are properly supported (no Kubuntu style underfunded support), the repos are fairly big (but smaller than Debian/Ubuntu) and bug fixes usually happen fast.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527208</id>
	<title>Re:GNU Hurd is not an OS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261513200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought OS/2 was half an OS?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought OS/2 was half an OS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought OS/2 was half an OS?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526454</id>
	<title>Re:I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>Orange Crush</author>
	<datestamp>1261510500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DirectX was Microsoft's solution to the "exit to DOS to run a game" workaround.  It also targetted the "You must have one of these sound cards, one of these graphics cards, etc." that hampered DOS games because the OS wasn't doing any hardware abstraction--they had to roll their own drivers for every game engine/runtime.  DirectX *was* the runtime that enabled direct hardware access and hardware abstraction so the game designers could focus on making games, rather than which sound card a user had.</p><p>It wasn't a perfect solutions--still isn't--but DirectX did kill DOS as a gaming platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DirectX was Microsoft 's solution to the " exit to DOS to run a game " workaround .
It also targetted the " You must have one of these sound cards , one of these graphics cards , etc .
" that hampered DOS games because the OS was n't doing any hardware abstraction--they had to roll their own drivers for every game engine/runtime .
DirectX * was * the runtime that enabled direct hardware access and hardware abstraction so the game designers could focus on making games , rather than which sound card a user had.It was n't a perfect solutions--still is n't--but DirectX did kill DOS as a gaming platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DirectX was Microsoft's solution to the "exit to DOS to run a game" workaround.
It also targetted the "You must have one of these sound cards, one of these graphics cards, etc.
" that hampered DOS games because the OS wasn't doing any hardware abstraction--they had to roll their own drivers for every game engine/runtime.
DirectX *was* the runtime that enabled direct hardware access and hardware abstraction so the game designers could focus on making games, rather than which sound card a user had.It wasn't a perfect solutions--still isn't--but DirectX did kill DOS as a gaming platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526864</id>
	<title>Surprised that OS/2 wasn't on the list</title>
	<author>marquis111</author>
	<datestamp>1261511880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stable? Yes<br>Ugly? Yes<br>Last release? 2001.<br>Still widely used in the 2000's?  Definitely, though declining precipitously.<br>Good or bad, it should have been on the list.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stable ?
YesUgly ? YesLast release ?
2001.Still widely used in the 2000 's ?
Definitely , though declining precipitously.Good or bad , it should have been on the list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stable?
YesUgly? YesLast release?
2001.Still widely used in the 2000's?
Definitely, though declining precipitously.Good or bad, it should have been on the list.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30533864</id>
	<title>Re:Solaris? Give me a break.</title>
	<author>Gunstick</author>
	<datestamp>1259752800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yes, solaris is horrible. It's only useful for install-and-forget. Never patch or upgrade. It's just plain simply impossible.<br>If you want a package manager style update and patching system from a professional (means those big box mover guys) vendor go with HP-UX and AIX. *never* solaris.<br>Or you can still stick with a serious linux distro.</p><p>Windows? Forget it. "you need soft MS-xy for this feature". OK, I install that. Start... "you need<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET frameork for soft MS-xy to work". Come on! Where are the dependencies and repository features in windows? And this is in freaking win2008 for 100\% MS only products.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , solaris is horrible .
It 's only useful for install-and-forget .
Never patch or upgrade .
It 's just plain simply impossible.If you want a package manager style update and patching system from a professional ( means those big box mover guys ) vendor go with HP-UX and AIX .
* never * solaris.Or you can still stick with a serious linux distro.Windows ?
Forget it .
" you need soft MS-xy for this feature " .
OK , I install that .
Start... " you need .NET frameork for soft MS-xy to work " .
Come on !
Where are the dependencies and repository features in windows ?
And this is in freaking win2008 for 100 \ % MS only products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, solaris is horrible.
It's only useful for install-and-forget.
Never patch or upgrade.
It's just plain simply impossible.If you want a package manager style update and patching system from a professional (means those big box mover guys) vendor go with HP-UX and AIX.
*never* solaris.Or you can still stick with a serious linux distro.Windows?
Forget it.
"you need soft MS-xy for this feature".
OK, I install that.
Start... "you need .NET frameork for soft MS-xy to work".
Come on!
Where are the dependencies and repository features in windows?
And this is in freaking win2008 for 100\% MS only products.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525882</id>
	<title>Silly article.</title>
	<author>kellin</author>
	<datestamp>1261508160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like how the author rates Vista a bad OS and Server 2008 a good OS.</p><p>Neither are any good.  2008 is nothing but headache inducing around this place.  It blue screens more than any other OS Ive seen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like how the author rates Vista a bad OS and Server 2008 a good OS.Neither are any good .
2008 is nothing but headache inducing around this place .
It blue screens more than any other OS Ive seen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like how the author rates Vista a bad OS and Server 2008 a good OS.Neither are any good.
2008 is nothing but headache inducing around this place.
It blue screens more than any other OS Ive seen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822</id>
	<title>I will stand by this forever</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1261507920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have never had an operating system that I loved more than Windows 95.</p><p>If there was one feature I wish I could have back, it is reboot into DOS.</p><p>Seriously, if they had included this with Vista, and I could boot my games from DOS, it would have made up for all other deficiencies.</p><p>There is a reason why they made you do this in old games. I wasn't actually old enough at the time to know what they were, but if I had to venture a guess now, it might have to do with saving resources (More RAMs for Graphix!).</p><p>Since Vista was so bloated, this would have been exactly what I needed. Though I suppose this might have ruined their memory management system or whatever they built in, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have never had an operating system that I loved more than Windows 95.If there was one feature I wish I could have back , it is reboot into DOS.Seriously , if they had included this with Vista , and I could boot my games from DOS , it would have made up for all other deficiencies.There is a reason why they made you do this in old games .
I was n't actually old enough at the time to know what they were , but if I had to venture a guess now , it might have to do with saving resources ( More RAMs for Graphix !
) .Since Vista was so bloated , this would have been exactly what I needed .
Though I suppose this might have ruined their memory management system or whatever they built in , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have never had an operating system that I loved more than Windows 95.If there was one feature I wish I could have back, it is reboot into DOS.Seriously, if they had included this with Vista, and I could boot my games from DOS, it would have made up for all other deficiencies.There is a reason why they made you do this in old games.
I wasn't actually old enough at the time to know what they were, but if I had to venture a guess now, it might have to do with saving resources (More RAMs for Graphix!
).Since Vista was so bloated, this would have been exactly what I needed.
Though I suppose this might have ruined their memory management system or whatever they built in, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526192</id>
	<title>Nonsense Article</title>
	<author>Tomsk70</author>
	<datestamp>1261509480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Hmmm, what can we type to make it appeal to the fanboys?".</p><p>That's nearly two minutes of my life I won't get back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Hmmm , what can we type to make it appeal to the fanboys ?
" .That 's nearly two minutes of my life I wo n't get back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Hmmm, what can we type to make it appeal to the fanboys?
".That's nearly two minutes of my life I won't get back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530196</id>
	<title>Re:uh, what?</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1261481640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>GNU rewritten Unix utilities tool set were invented by through the purity in effort of Richard Stallman</i></p><p>GAME TO OF HELLO STARCRAFT YOU LIKE WOULD TO PLAY? GROUTY!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GNU rewritten Unix utilities tool set were invented by through the purity in effort of Richard StallmanGAME TO OF HELLO STARCRAFT YOU LIKE WOULD TO PLAY ?
GROUTY !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GNU rewritten Unix utilities tool set were invented by through the purity in effort of Richard StallmanGAME TO OF HELLO STARCRAFT YOU LIKE WOULD TO PLAY?
GROUTY!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526360</id>
	<title>I was in...</title>
	<author>MonsterTrimble</author>
	<datestamp>1261510200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>until page 3: <p><div class="quote"><p>GNU/Linux (especially 2.6.18+)<br>
Never has their been such an uproar in computing as a free kernel and free utilities-- all done very well with rapid, mindful if darwinian skill. Linus Torvalds crafted Linux, and has been holding on for dear life ever since. Coupled with the GNU utilities and two main window manager branches (Gnome and KDE), Linux underpinnings now grace objects from tiny wristwatches and clever cell/mobile phones, to IBM mainframes and everything in between. The promise of Linux for civilians is slowly but surely being realized through distros like Ubuntu, Novell/SUSE, Mandrive, Knoppix, and others, but the enterprise server market belongs to Red Hat, Novell/SUSE, and communities formed around each of these. That doesn't mean that there isn't worth in the literally hundreds of distros out there.</p> </div><p>Off the top of my head:</p><p>
1) 'Civilian distros' such as Knoppix &amp; Mandrive? Knoppix is mainly used as a rescue CD and Mandrive DOESN'T EXIST. Mandrake/Mandriva does, but not Mandrive!<br>
2) Novell/SUSE twice, but no Debian or Fedora?<br>
3) GNU utilities? Are those still prevalent?</p><p>Whatever, this article officially fails</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>until page 3 : GNU/Linux ( especially 2.6.18 + ) Never has their been such an uproar in computing as a free kernel and free utilities-- all done very well with rapid , mindful if darwinian skill .
Linus Torvalds crafted Linux , and has been holding on for dear life ever since .
Coupled with the GNU utilities and two main window manager branches ( Gnome and KDE ) , Linux underpinnings now grace objects from tiny wristwatches and clever cell/mobile phones , to IBM mainframes and everything in between .
The promise of Linux for civilians is slowly but surely being realized through distros like Ubuntu , Novell/SUSE , Mandrive , Knoppix , and others , but the enterprise server market belongs to Red Hat , Novell/SUSE , and communities formed around each of these .
That does n't mean that there is n't worth in the literally hundreds of distros out there .
Off the top of my head : 1 ) 'Civilian distros ' such as Knoppix &amp; Mandrive ?
Knoppix is mainly used as a rescue CD and Mandrive DOES N'T EXIST .
Mandrake/Mandriva does , but not Mandrive !
2 ) Novell/SUSE twice , but no Debian or Fedora ?
3 ) GNU utilities ?
Are those still prevalent ? Whatever , this article officially fails</tokentext>
<sentencetext>until page 3: GNU/Linux (especially 2.6.18+)
Never has their been such an uproar in computing as a free kernel and free utilities-- all done very well with rapid, mindful if darwinian skill.
Linus Torvalds crafted Linux, and has been holding on for dear life ever since.
Coupled with the GNU utilities and two main window manager branches (Gnome and KDE), Linux underpinnings now grace objects from tiny wristwatches and clever cell/mobile phones, to IBM mainframes and everything in between.
The promise of Linux for civilians is slowly but surely being realized through distros like Ubuntu, Novell/SUSE, Mandrive, Knoppix, and others, but the enterprise server market belongs to Red Hat, Novell/SUSE, and communities formed around each of these.
That doesn't mean that there isn't worth in the literally hundreds of distros out there.
Off the top of my head:
1) 'Civilian distros' such as Knoppix &amp; Mandrive?
Knoppix is mainly used as a rescue CD and Mandrive DOESN'T EXIST.
Mandrake/Mandriva does, but not Mandrive!
2) Novell/SUSE twice, but no Debian or Fedora?
3) GNU utilities?
Are those still prevalent?Whatever, this article officially fails
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531162</id>
	<title>Re:BeOS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261487160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>not a problem with the zomcon collar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>not a problem with the zomcon collar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not a problem with the zomcon collar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530878</id>
	<title>Re:Love the droid</title>
	<author>HenryKoren</author>
	<datestamp>1261485240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know it's funny that Android gets designated as one of the Best OS, and has people like you claiming that it "brought" multitasking to the smartphone, when windows mobile was multitasking long before Android existed.</p><p>I'm a windows mobile 6.1 user, I can multitask just find, and I can watch Flash and Silverlight video in my web browser (Skyfire).   My mobile OS may be "Way Behind" according to this blatantly anti-Microsoft article, but it does plenty of things that Androids and iPhones can't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know it 's funny that Android gets designated as one of the Best OS , and has people like you claiming that it " brought " multitasking to the smartphone , when windows mobile was multitasking long before Android existed.I 'm a windows mobile 6.1 user , I can multitask just find , and I can watch Flash and Silverlight video in my web browser ( Skyfire ) .
My mobile OS may be " Way Behind " according to this blatantly anti-Microsoft article , but it does plenty of things that Androids and iPhones ca n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know it's funny that Android gets designated as one of the Best OS, and has people like you claiming that it "brought" multitasking to the smartphone, when windows mobile was multitasking long before Android existed.I'm a windows mobile 6.1 user, I can multitask just find, and I can watch Flash and Silverlight video in my web browser (Skyfire).
My mobile OS may be "Way Behind" according to this blatantly anti-Microsoft article, but it does plenty of things that Androids and iPhones can't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526146</id>
	<title>Gnu Hurd?</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1261509240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't an operating system need to be actually completed and released to qualify for either of these lists? Putting Hurd on here is analogous to including Duke Nukem Forever in a "Best/Worst games of the decade" compendium.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't an operating system need to be actually completed and released to qualify for either of these lists ?
Putting Hurd on here is analogous to including Duke Nukem Forever in a " Best/Worst games of the decade " compendium .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't an operating system need to be actually completed and released to qualify for either of these lists?
Putting Hurd on here is analogous to including Duke Nukem Forever in a "Best/Worst games of the decade" compendium.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525730</id>
	<title>Slashdoted already?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261507500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'l put my vote on Windows 2.0 then. Gasthly blue colors choosen to look good on crappy CGA monitors. Ugh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I'l put my vote on Windows 2.0 then .
Gasthly blue colors choosen to look good on crappy CGA monitors .
Ugh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'l put my vote on Windows 2.0 then.
Gasthly blue colors choosen to look good on crappy CGA monitors.
Ugh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527516
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30601544
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30542704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30535918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30535568
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30536208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30534930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30534064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30533924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30536554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30533864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30537246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531662
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30555288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30542122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30534664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_176252_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30534064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525932
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526014
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30535568
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528482
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526170
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527062
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30537246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526994
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526000
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526038
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525976
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528102
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526264
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526218
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526582
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525856
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30534930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30536208
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526724
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30535918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526362
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528034
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532994
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526180
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526512
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30555288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526246
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30534664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30601544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30533924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30542704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30533864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525806
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526142
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529688
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30532420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527472
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30525794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526050
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526084
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30529038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30528214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531662
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30531122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30542122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30536554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30527254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_176252.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30526222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_176252.30530480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
