<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_28_0213213</id>
	<title>Chinese Pirates Launch Ubuntu That Looks Like XP</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1262024820000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Ylmf, famous for pirating Windows XP, have just released a <a href="http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/12/26/chinese-copy-cat-pirates-launch-ubuntu-that-looks-just-like-windows-xp/">version of Ubuntu that looks just like Windows XP</a>. Really, really similar. Apparently because Microsoft were cracking down on the actual Windows XP pirating &mdash; though I think they will still suffer for ripping off the GUI <em>exactly.</em>"</i> Of course, if that's the sort of look you like for your desktop, you need not risk any download cooties or language barriers; a <a href="http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8562983&amp;postcount=11">reader in the Ubuntu Forums</a> suggests this instructional video for <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4StlvX-kOg">giving Gnome the XP treatment</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Ylmf , famous for pirating Windows XP , have just released a version of Ubuntu that looks just like Windows XP .
Really , really similar .
Apparently because Microsoft were cracking down on the actual Windows XP pirating    though I think they will still suffer for ripping off the GUI exactly .
" Of course , if that 's the sort of look you like for your desktop , you need not risk any download cooties or language barriers ; a reader in the Ubuntu Forums suggests this instructional video for giving Gnome the XP treatment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Ylmf, famous for pirating Windows XP, have just released a version of Ubuntu that looks just like Windows XP.
Really, really similar.
Apparently because Microsoft were cracking down on the actual Windows XP pirating — though I think they will still suffer for ripping off the GUI exactly.
" Of course, if that's the sort of look you like for your desktop, you need not risk any download cooties or language barriers; a reader in the Ubuntu Forums suggests this instructional video for giving Gnome the XP treatment.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568830</id>
	<title>This is a complete waste of time</title>
	<author>bashmohandes</author>
	<datestamp>1261943700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would somebody spend this time to make a 2009 OS look like 1999 OS??</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would somebody spend this time to make a 2009 OS look like 1999 OS ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would somebody spend this time to make a 2009 OS look like 1999 OS?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569066</id>
	<title>Linux XP</title>
	<author>ahabswhale</author>
	<datestamp>1261990980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Russians already did this: <a href="http://www.linux-xp.com/desktop/2010-release-notes/" title="linux-xp.com">http://www.linux-xp.com/desktop/2010-release-notes/</a> [linux-xp.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Russians already did this : http : //www.linux-xp.com/desktop/2010-release-notes/ [ linux-xp.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Russians already did this: http://www.linux-xp.com/desktop/2010-release-notes/ [linux-xp.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30588322</id>
	<title>My in-laws think their Ubuntu install is XP.</title>
	<author>MrJimbo</author>
	<datestamp>1262088840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Becoming sick of being tech support for my in-laws, I reloaded their Dell desktop with Ubuntu 9.10 and threw an XP theme on it about a month ago.

The tech support calls have reduced, and they are happy-go-lucky reading emails and surfing the internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Becoming sick of being tech support for my in-laws , I reloaded their Dell desktop with Ubuntu 9.10 and threw an XP theme on it about a month ago .
The tech support calls have reduced , and they are happy-go-lucky reading emails and surfing the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Becoming sick of being tech support for my in-laws, I reloaded their Dell desktop with Ubuntu 9.10 and threw an XP theme on it about a month ago.
The tech support calls have reduced, and they are happy-go-lucky reading emails and surfing the internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568790</id>
	<title>Point of a XP lookalike Ubuntu...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261943160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Turns out, the XP Theme is to ease the transition of Windows users into Ubuntu/Gnome.  Not sure if Microsoft will retaliate regarding the Fisher-Price like UI XP uses. (Luna)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Turns out , the XP Theme is to ease the transition of Windows users into Ubuntu/Gnome .
Not sure if Microsoft will retaliate regarding the Fisher-Price like UI XP uses .
( Luna )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Turns out, the XP Theme is to ease the transition of Windows users into Ubuntu/Gnome.
Not sure if Microsoft will retaliate regarding the Fisher-Price like UI XP uses.
(Luna)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570306</id>
	<title>probably 99\% actual windows source code</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1262010840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Chinese are nortious for stealing others people's source code and trying to sell it under various guises.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese are nortious for stealing others people 's source code and trying to sell it under various guises .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese are nortious for stealing others people's source code and trying to sell it under various guises.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571360</id>
	<title>Re:Graphics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262017200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Technically they are counterfiters, not pirates.</p><p>Their windows is as genuine as the rollex that you buy on the streets of Beijing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Technically they are counterfiters , not pirates.Their windows is as genuine as the rollex that you buy on the streets of Beijing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technically they are counterfiters, not pirates.Their windows is as genuine as the rollex that you buy on the streets of Beijing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572414</id>
	<title>Re:Graphics</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1262022420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>but can the BSA be sent after them in this case?  what I mean is that they now would have to send out a different team and make up a whole new set of legal documents and procedures to go after the copyright infringements. It's not going to be the same MiB squad who has been running around looking for software pirating infractions. If anything, those people will have to be trained on handing the new issue here and now they won't be able to just look at the screen, see Windows XP, and as for the license.  They'll be wasting time on these decoy systems.<br><br>Surprisingly, they really went about it the wrong way though. They should have made Windows look like Linux so when these people see computers which don't look like they are running Windows, they'll just keep on walking.<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>but can the BSA be sent after them in this case ?
what I mean is that they now would have to send out a different team and make up a whole new set of legal documents and procedures to go after the copyright infringements .
It 's not going to be the same MiB squad who has been running around looking for software pirating infractions .
If anything , those people will have to be trained on handing the new issue here and now they wo n't be able to just look at the screen , see Windows XP , and as for the license .
They 'll be wasting time on these decoy systems.Surprisingly , they really went about it the wrong way though .
They should have made Windows look like Linux so when these people see computers which do n't look like they are running Windows , they 'll just keep on walking.LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but can the BSA be sent after them in this case?
what I mean is that they now would have to send out a different team and make up a whole new set of legal documents and procedures to go after the copyright infringements.
It's not going to be the same MiB squad who has been running around looking for software pirating infractions.
If anything, those people will have to be trained on handing the new issue here and now they won't be able to just look at the screen, see Windows XP, and as for the license.
They'll be wasting time on these decoy systems.Surprisingly, they really went about it the wrong way though.
They should have made Windows look like Linux so when these people see computers which don't look like they are running Windows, they'll just keep on walking.LoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30577566</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates</title>
	<author>ksemlerK</author>
	<datestamp>1262007360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about "boosted", "jacked", "kiped", "lifted", "5 fingered" etc?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about " boosted " , " jacked " , " kiped " , " lifted " , " 5 fingered " etc ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about "boosted", "jacked", "kiped", "lifted", "5 fingered" etc?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568960</id>
	<title>Links</title>
	<author>a0schweitzer</author>
	<datestamp>1262032680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Linuxologist ran a <a href="http://linuxologist.com/linuxhowto/howto-make-ubuntu-look-like-windows-xp/" title="linuxologist.com" rel="nofollow">story covering the video</a> [linuxologist.com] (and accompanying conversion script), mentioned by the OP, a while ago. Apparently there's an <a href="http://ubuntu.online02.com/node/14/" title="online02.com" rel="nofollow">entire project</a> [online02.com] for a gnome GUI conversion to make it look like XP.</p><p>I think it's pretty useful for convincing family members to make the switch to Ubuntu and cut down on personal Windows-related maintenance time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Linuxologist ran a story covering the video [ linuxologist.com ] ( and accompanying conversion script ) , mentioned by the OP , a while ago .
Apparently there 's an entire project [ online02.com ] for a gnome GUI conversion to make it look like XP.I think it 's pretty useful for convincing family members to make the switch to Ubuntu and cut down on personal Windows-related maintenance time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Linuxologist ran a story covering the video [linuxologist.com] (and accompanying conversion script), mentioned by the OP, a while ago.
Apparently there's an entire project [online02.com] for a gnome GUI conversion to make it look like XP.I think it's pretty useful for convincing family members to make the switch to Ubuntu and cut down on personal Windows-related maintenance time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569592</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>the\_womble</author>
	<datestamp>1262001900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do not know blender, but Linux distros and apps usually come with good default configurations of the GUI, but are flexible enough to make it look and work a bit differently.</p><p>You seem to be saying that it would be good to get rid of this flexibility. Why? People do not have to change themes if they do not want to. In my experience naive users do not have much of a problem using the defaults.</p><p>I have never seen a "one way GUI" such as you describe. Yes its bad, but it not common. I have not seen the problems you describe with alert boxes on Linux any more than on Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do not know blender , but Linux distros and apps usually come with good default configurations of the GUI , but are flexible enough to make it look and work a bit differently.You seem to be saying that it would be good to get rid of this flexibility .
Why ? People do not have to change themes if they do not want to .
In my experience naive users do not have much of a problem using the defaults.I have never seen a " one way GUI " such as you describe .
Yes its bad , but it not common .
I have not seen the problems you describe with alert boxes on Linux any more than on Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do not know blender, but Linux distros and apps usually come with good default configurations of the GUI, but are flexible enough to make it look and work a bit differently.You seem to be saying that it would be good to get rid of this flexibility.
Why? People do not have to change themes if they do not want to.
In my experience naive users do not have much of a problem using the defaults.I have never seen a "one way GUI" such as you describe.
Yes its bad, but it not common.
I have not seen the problems you describe with alert boxes on Linux any more than on Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569574</id>
	<title>Just in time</title>
	<author>houghi</author>
	<datestamp>1262001480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... to make 2010 the year of the Linux desktop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... to make 2010 the year of the Linux desktop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... to make 2010 the year of the Linux desktop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568974</id>
	<title>Queue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262032800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All the pro-China/anti-US comments.</p><p>5, 4, 3, 2, 1....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All the pro-China/anti-US comments.5 , 4 , 3 , 2 , 1... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the pro-China/anti-US comments.5, 4, 3, 2, 1....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30573564</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>TuomasK</author>
	<datestamp>1262027400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually MS is also moving to this direction. With Server 2008 R2 when you do some things with a GUI, it runs a PowerShell script to make the changes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually MS is also moving to this direction .
With Server 2008 R2 when you do some things with a GUI , it runs a PowerShell script to make the changes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually MS is also moving to this direction.
With Server 2008 R2 when you do some things with a GUI, it runs a PowerShell script to make the changes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30713614</id>
	<title>Send your files regardless of having linux or xp</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1231584960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>To send my files to my friends and family, I use a file sharing website called Spider Send. It won't matter if you're one Windows Machine, Linux or Mac. You can easily <a href="http://www.spidersend.com/" title="spidersend.com" rel="nofollow">send big files</a> [spidersend.com] to any one. Check it out and enjoy their fast and secure service.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To send my files to my friends and family , I use a file sharing website called Spider Send .
It wo n't matter if you 're one Windows Machine , Linux or Mac .
You can easily send big files [ spidersend.com ] to any one .
Check it out and enjoy their fast and secure service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To send my files to my friends and family, I use a file sharing website called Spider Send.
It won't matter if you're one Windows Machine, Linux or Mac.
You can easily send big files [spidersend.com] to any one.
Check it out and enjoy their fast and secure service.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569372</id>
	<title>I actually looked</title>
	<author>Andtalath</author>
	<datestamp>1261997220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the screenshots.</p><p>It was an XP theme with a taskbar at the bottom and.<br>That's not impressive, they hadn't worked out the icons to look the same for instance.</p><p>So, well, not impressed.<br>But, yeah, sure, grandma and grandpa won't notice that it's not windows until they try to do anything out of the ordinary.</p><p>Also, it's never good enough to be almost as good, not even good enough to be as good.<br>You have to be better.<br>Therefore, this is a typically bad idea for linux in general, especially since it tells us "We can't do better than microsofts almost decade old OS".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the screenshots.It was an XP theme with a taskbar at the bottom and.That 's not impressive , they had n't worked out the icons to look the same for instance.So , well , not impressed.But , yeah , sure , grandma and grandpa wo n't notice that it 's not windows until they try to do anything out of the ordinary.Also , it 's never good enough to be almost as good , not even good enough to be as good.You have to be better.Therefore , this is a typically bad idea for linux in general , especially since it tells us " We ca n't do better than microsofts almost decade old OS " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the screenshots.It was an XP theme with a taskbar at the bottom and.That's not impressive, they hadn't worked out the icons to look the same for instance.So, well, not impressed.But, yeah, sure, grandma and grandpa won't notice that it's not windows until they try to do anything out of the ordinary.Also, it's never good enough to be almost as good, not even good enough to be as good.You have to be better.Therefore, this is a typically bad idea for linux in general, especially since it tells us "We can't do better than microsofts almost decade old OS".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568718</id>
	<title>why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261942140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>    Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
    Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569386</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1261997400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>all you get back is [...] a text stream. [...] could return structured results to the caller.</p></div><p>Parsers.  'Nuff said.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Two rules often forgotten: "You should never have to tell the computer something it already knows"</p></div><p>I'd like to extrapolate that: you should never have to tell the computer the same thing twice.  You should be able to make the computer act on general rules.</p><p>I really hate that with Network Manager, I can't tell it "whenever you see one of the essids [home, work], connect automatically".  Why the hell do I have to spend my precious time clicking stuff when I already know what I'm going to click on?</p><p>(Linux lets me express general rules about what my computer should do, in the language of shell scripts etc.; for that, I love it.  Thanks also to wpa\_supplicant's roaming mode.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>all you get back is [ ... ] a text stream .
[ ... ] could return structured results to the caller.Parsers .
'Nuff said.Two rules often forgotten : " You should never have to tell the computer something it already knows " I 'd like to extrapolate that : you should never have to tell the computer the same thing twice .
You should be able to make the computer act on general rules.I really hate that with Network Manager , I ca n't tell it " whenever you see one of the essids [ home , work ] , connect automatically " .
Why the hell do I have to spend my precious time clicking stuff when I already know what I 'm going to click on ?
( Linux lets me express general rules about what my computer should do , in the language of shell scripts etc .
; for that , I love it .
Thanks also to wpa \ _supplicant 's roaming mode .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>all you get back is [...] a text stream.
[...] could return structured results to the caller.Parsers.
'Nuff said.Two rules often forgotten: "You should never have to tell the computer something it already knows"I'd like to extrapolate that: you should never have to tell the computer the same thing twice.
You should be able to make the computer act on general rules.I really hate that with Network Manager, I can't tell it "whenever you see one of the essids [home, work], connect automatically".
Why the hell do I have to spend my precious time clicking stuff when I already know what I'm going to click on?
(Linux lets me express general rules about what my computer should do, in the language of shell scripts etc.
; for that, I love it.
Thanks also to wpa\_supplicant's roaming mode.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568908</id>
	<title>It will be in high demand</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262031780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>once people discover how well it works compared to their usual Windows experience.</htmltext>
<tokenext>once people discover how well it works compared to their usual Windows experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>once people discover how well it works compared to their usual Windows experience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30577872</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Erikderzweite</author>
	<datestamp>1262009580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;I really hate that with Network Manager, I can't tell it "whenever you see one of the essids [home, work], connect automatically"</p><p>Why can I do exactly that? Every network has a "Connect automatically" checkbox. Besides, dispatcher.d scripts allow me to define rules for each connection (e.g. starting vpnc when I connect to my university's network).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I really hate that with Network Manager , I ca n't tell it " whenever you see one of the essids [ home , work ] , connect automatically " Why can I do exactly that ?
Every network has a " Connect automatically " checkbox .
Besides , dispatcher.d scripts allow me to define rules for each connection ( e.g .
starting vpnc when I connect to my university 's network ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;I really hate that with Network Manager, I can't tell it "whenever you see one of the essids [home, work], connect automatically"Why can I do exactly that?
Every network has a "Connect automatically" checkbox.
Besides, dispatcher.d scripts allow me to define rules for each connection (e.g.
starting vpnc when I connect to my university's network).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568852</id>
	<title>Why still?</title>
	<author>craagz</author>
	<datestamp>1262030400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why is Microsoft still pursuing Win XP cloning? Now that it has ended support for Win XP? Let them pirates be!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is Microsoft still pursuing Win XP cloning ?
Now that it has ended support for Win XP ?
Let them pirates be !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is Microsoft still pursuing Win XP cloning?
Now that it has ended support for Win XP?
Let them pirates be!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569484</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261999680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream"</i></p><p>A text stream is not a bad thing. All you need to do is serialize and unserialize.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess , you can pass in a list of arguments , but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream " A text stream is not a bad thing .
All you need to do is serialize and unserialize .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream"A text stream is not a bad thing.
All you need to do is serialize and unserialize.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30575488</id>
	<title>where is the problem?</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1261993920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They should go easy on Microsoft trademarked/copyright images, but other than that, I don't see a problem with making an Ubuntu that looks "really similar" to Windows XP.  It will make many users feel more comfortable, and many users really couldn't care less whether they are running Ubuntu or XP, as long as they get a web browser and a good office suite.  If anything, they'll find Ubuntu menus and the Ubuntu GUI more streamlined and easier to use than XP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should go easy on Microsoft trademarked/copyright images , but other than that , I do n't see a problem with making an Ubuntu that looks " really similar " to Windows XP .
It will make many users feel more comfortable , and many users really could n't care less whether they are running Ubuntu or XP , as long as they get a web browser and a good office suite .
If anything , they 'll find Ubuntu menus and the Ubuntu GUI more streamlined and easier to use than XP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should go easy on Microsoft trademarked/copyright images, but other than that, I don't see a problem with making an Ubuntu that looks "really similar" to Windows XP.
It will make many users feel more comfortable, and many users really couldn't care less whether they are running Ubuntu or XP, as long as they get a web browser and a good office suite.
If anything, they'll find Ubuntu menus and the Ubuntu GUI more streamlined and easier to use than XP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569264</id>
	<title>Tranlate it with chrome</title>
	<author>kokoko1</author>
	<datestamp>1261994640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>you can translate the whole site <a href="http://www.ylmf.org/" title="ylmf.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.ylmf.org/</a> [ylmf.org] using Chrome and translate addon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>you can translate the whole site http : //www.ylmf.org/ [ ylmf.org ] using Chrome and translate addon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you can translate the whole site http://www.ylmf.org/ [ylmf.org] using Chrome and translate addon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571086</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262015880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>First off, you're blaming some stupid knockoff EEEPC vendor's mistakes on your omnipresent "Linux community?" Keep beating them until they're dead - nobody likes those guys.<br> <br>But you still keep ranting past that about Blender and other apps who allow customization. Sounds like someone doesn't under the concept of "opinion," or even the phrase "we value things differently around here." Linux is an OS that is designed for advanced users first. That's its target audience. Only recently has their been a push to make it easier for other to use, and with Ubuntu and its ilk, it's been very, very successful at doing so (to the point that you never need to use a CLI). So of course you're still going to get apps that cater to the avdanced user. Since when has Blender been an application that advertised a user friendly GUI that even your old mum could use?<br> <br>A good default is good, but it will never, ever replace the chance to alter said defaults to your taste.</htmltext>
<tokenext>First off , you 're blaming some stupid knockoff EEEPC vendor 's mistakes on your omnipresent " Linux community ?
" Keep beating them until they 're dead - nobody likes those guys .
But you still keep ranting past that about Blender and other apps who allow customization .
Sounds like someone does n't under the concept of " opinion , " or even the phrase " we value things differently around here .
" Linux is an OS that is designed for advanced users first .
That 's its target audience .
Only recently has their been a push to make it easier for other to use , and with Ubuntu and its ilk , it 's been very , very successful at doing so ( to the point that you never need to use a CLI ) .
So of course you 're still going to get apps that cater to the avdanced user .
Since when has Blender been an application that advertised a user friendly GUI that even your old mum could use ?
A good default is good , but it will never , ever replace the chance to alter said defaults to your taste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First off, you're blaming some stupid knockoff EEEPC vendor's mistakes on your omnipresent "Linux community?
" Keep beating them until they're dead - nobody likes those guys.
But you still keep ranting past that about Blender and other apps who allow customization.
Sounds like someone doesn't under the concept of "opinion," or even the phrase "we value things differently around here.
" Linux is an OS that is designed for advanced users first.
That's its target audience.
Only recently has their been a push to make it easier for other to use, and with Ubuntu and its ilk, it's been very, very successful at doing so (to the point that you never need to use a CLI).
So of course you're still going to get apps that cater to the avdanced user.
Since when has Blender been an application that advertised a user friendly GUI that even your old mum could use?
A good default is good, but it will never, ever replace the chance to alter said defaults to your taste.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569582</id>
	<title>Re:Make WinXP look like KDE; Make GNOME look like</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262001660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ok, I dont understand why you would want to make xp look like kde.... why break something if it works... hehe oh never mind</p><p>Making gnome look like XP doesnt help... it still does not have any real intuitive functionality and will still feel like windows 95.</p><p>making windows xp look like ubuntu is dumb, thats like trying to make xp look like windows 95 (or kde).</p><p>litestep wont make xp look like enlightenment. It'll just crash every now and then with a loud !bang</p><p>linux allready looks and feels like windows 95. The newest ubuntu theme 'slutty khoala' caters just for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ok , I dont understand why you would want to make xp look like kde.... why break something if it works... hehe oh never mindMaking gnome look like XP doesnt help... it still does not have any real intuitive functionality and will still feel like windows 95.making windows xp look like ubuntu is dumb , thats like trying to make xp look like windows 95 ( or kde ) .litestep wont make xp look like enlightenment .
It 'll just crash every now and then with a loud ! banglinux allready looks and feels like windows 95 .
The newest ubuntu theme 'slutty khoala ' caters just for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ok, I dont understand why you would want to make xp look like kde.... why break something if it works... hehe oh never mindMaking gnome look like XP doesnt help... it still does not have any real intuitive functionality and will still feel like windows 95.making windows xp look like ubuntu is dumb, thats like trying to make xp look like windows 95 (or kde).litestep wont make xp look like enlightenment.
It'll just crash every now and then with a loud !banglinux allready looks and feels like windows 95.
The newest ubuntu theme 'slutty khoala' caters just for that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569166</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572018</id>
	<title>A FOSS OS that looks like Windows XP?</title>
	<author>Orion Blastar</author>
	<datestamp>1262020620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Either set Linux and GNOME to look like XP yourself or use <a href="http://www.reactos.org/" title="reactos.org">ReactOS</a> [reactos.org] instead as an alternative to Windows XP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Either set Linux and GNOME to look like XP yourself or use ReactOS [ reactos.org ] instead as an alternative to Windows XP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Either set Linux and GNOME to look like XP yourself or use ReactOS [reactos.org] instead as an alternative to Windows XP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30713632</id>
	<title>File Sharing regardless of the OS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1231585620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whether you're on windows or linux, you can use a file sharing website called Spider Send to transfer your files. It's a website like yousendit or zshare.
<br>
You can use it to <a href="http://www.spidersend.com/" title="spidersend.com" rel="nofollow">send big files</a> [spidersend.com] to any one. Their file transfer service is fast and secure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whether you 're on windows or linux , you can use a file sharing website called Spider Send to transfer your files .
It 's a website like yousendit or zshare .
You can use it to send big files [ spidersend.com ] to any one .
Their file transfer service is fast and secure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whether you're on windows or linux, you can use a file sharing website called Spider Send to transfer your files.
It's a website like yousendit or zshare.
You can use it to send big files [spidersend.com] to any one.
Their file transfer service is fast and secure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568996</id>
	<title>What about Windows 2000?</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1262033160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meh... I'd rather have it use the Windows 2000 UI.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meh... I 'd rather have it use the Windows 2000 UI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meh... I'd rather have it use the Windows 2000 UI.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569030</id>
	<title>Excellent!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262033580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is so perfect it isn't even funny. I can now replace the XP on my parent's computer with Linux and they won't know the difference. The "family support plan" just got a whole lot easier for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is so perfect it is n't even funny .
I can now replace the XP on my parent 's computer with Linux and they wo n't know the difference .
The " family support plan " just got a whole lot easier for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is so perfect it isn't even funny.
I can now replace the XP on my parent's computer with Linux and they won't know the difference.
The "family support plan" just got a whole lot easier for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570266</id>
	<title>does /. reflect an older generation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262010600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>a lot of the comments about how peole are panicked by a new GUI reflect, I think, the experience of people now in the 40s or older.<br>when i look at my kids, who are teens, and not at all computer people (geeks ina + sense0 they are really comfortable with computers and diff GUIs - when they start buying computers on their own, it may be the year of linux on teh desktop</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a lot of the comments about how peole are panicked by a new GUI reflect , I think , the experience of people now in the 40s or older.when i look at my kids , who are teens , and not at all computer people ( geeks ina + sense0 they are really comfortable with computers and diff GUIs - when they start buying computers on their own , it may be the year of linux on teh desktop</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a lot of the comments about how peole are panicked by a new GUI reflect, I think, the experience of people now in the 40s or older.when i look at my kids, who are teens, and not at all computer people (geeks ina + sense0 they are really comfortable with computers and diff GUIs - when they start buying computers on their own, it may be the year of linux on teh desktop</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569998</id>
	<title>Re:Make WinXP look like KDE; Make GNOME look like</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262008140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, but how do I make my DOS screen look like this new fangled WinUbuntuXPLinux thingy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but how do I make my DOS screen look like this new fangled WinUbuntuXPLinux thingy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but how do I make my DOS screen look like this new fangled WinUbuntuXPLinux thingy?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569166</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569370</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Arker</author>
	<datestamp>1261997220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are almost right, partly.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><blockquote><div><p>For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC. All the GUI gives you is success or failure. Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs used to set up the connection, several of which produce error messages in normal operation.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I have an EeePC and I know *precisely* what you are talking about. I agree it is bad, but I disagree with your solution entirely. This problem is amenable to a much simpler solution, there is no need for any drastic architectural changes. The basic architecture here is sound, there is no reason why the GUI-box should not just report success or failure and leave the actual diagnostic output to another box that the user only has cause to invoke if there is a problem. The real problem here is that errors are reported even when nothing is wrong. The best I can see this is due quite simply to the fact that no one is willing to pay one or two employees (they dont have to be highly skilled, just computer literate enough to track down scripts and edit them) to finish the job when they make a distribution. In this case, there are error on the EeePC that are normal all over the place, not just in this one box, but bloody everywhere. They are caused by using generic scripts, designed to work on an extraordinarily broad range of different installations, with no customisation. It is a relatively tiny amount of work to go through these scripts, figure out which lines are actually unneeded and inappropriate on *this* distribution, and remove them. Simple as that. </p><p>Now, when I fire up a newly installed white-box, I see a lot of similar spurious error messages scroll by. This is to be expected - I am using a general purpose distribution and it makes sense for the default scripts to have this result and to expect the person installing it to go ahead and take a few minutes to customise the scripts and get rid of the spurious commands, either by deletion or simply commenting them out. The only complaint I have in that setting is that it does, on occasion, seem unreasonably difficult to track down the scripts in question, as if the builders of the distro never even thought of anyone wanting to clean the thing up post-install. This attitude, or my perception of it, grates the nerves, it is just shoddy engineering. Error messages should NOT be normal, and an OS installation cannot be said to be complete until they are all cleaned up. When the user sees an error message they should be able to have confidence it is a real error. Instead they learn that it is 'normal' to have spurious error messages all over the place, they learn to ignore them, and then when there is a real error message that does need attention - it is ignored too. </p><p>On the EeePC, however, it is not excusable at all. This is a very specialised distribution created *specifically* for this hardware. There is no excuse whatsoever for these scripts not to have been cleaned up so that they produce no error messages on their intended hardware before the image was burned, period. </p><p>Another very annoying feature of that particular Operating System is that it does not support swap partitions. This really boils down to the same problem - the company producing it obviously couldnt be bothered to budget just a handful of hours with someone familiar with linux for this thing! More specifically, it appears that Asus was told by the manufacturer of the SSD used that it should absolutely never be used for virtual memory. This advice could only have come with someone that is familiar with Windows, but not with computers in general and certainly not with linux specifically. SSDs do have a limited number of read/write cycles, you see, and <b>Windows</b> WILL thrash virtual memory whenever given it, without rhyme or reason, it just insists on rewriting it fairly often. Allowing Windows to use an SSD for virtual memory <b>is</b> a very bad idea. <i>But Linux does not do this.</i> Linux is much more conservative in access. I can run my own custom distro on the same machine, format just enough of the SSD for swap space as I need to have for it to 'suspend to disk' and that partition has NEVER been touched otherwise. That partition will be the last part of the SSD to run out, not the first. But I do, literally, have to roll my own OS to get this working. It is a job that should have only needed to be done once, by Asus, and burned to their image, but they apparently couldnt be bothered so as a result every single customer has to learn to roll their own OS or do without one of the most critical features the machine is capable of! </p><p>IMOP it is little things like this that are holding Linux-based OS from market success. It has little or nothing to do with pretty graphics and time-wasters, every modern distro has more than enough of that. It has much more to do with basic failures to put in the minimum of polish and sanity checking to produce a polished product. No matter how good the generic core you start with, producing a proper operating system for a given piece of hardware is always going to involve some customisation like this. It is done with Windows all the time, and usually in a reasonably competent way. I have yet to see a single OEM windows install boot up with dozens of error messages because it is just trying to load drivers for every piece of hardware in the windows driver database for instance. Yet when they dabble in Linux that is exactly the kind of thing they do, reliably. </p><p>Again, this is not rocket science, you dont have to retain Linus Thorvalds for months to do it, heck, you dont even need a programmer. I would be happy to do it myself for a very reasonable wage, and in any major city there are probably hundreds if not thousands of teenagers that would do it for even less. So why is it never done? </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are almost right , partly .
: ) For a painful example of this problem , make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC .
All the GUI gives you is success or failure .
Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs used to set up the connection , several of which produce error messages in normal operation .
I have an EeePC and I know * precisely * what you are talking about .
I agree it is bad , but I disagree with your solution entirely .
This problem is amenable to a much simpler solution , there is no need for any drastic architectural changes .
The basic architecture here is sound , there is no reason why the GUI-box should not just report success or failure and leave the actual diagnostic output to another box that the user only has cause to invoke if there is a problem .
The real problem here is that errors are reported even when nothing is wrong .
The best I can see this is due quite simply to the fact that no one is willing to pay one or two employees ( they dont have to be highly skilled , just computer literate enough to track down scripts and edit them ) to finish the job when they make a distribution .
In this case , there are error on the EeePC that are normal all over the place , not just in this one box , but bloody everywhere .
They are caused by using generic scripts , designed to work on an extraordinarily broad range of different installations , with no customisation .
It is a relatively tiny amount of work to go through these scripts , figure out which lines are actually unneeded and inappropriate on * this * distribution , and remove them .
Simple as that .
Now , when I fire up a newly installed white-box , I see a lot of similar spurious error messages scroll by .
This is to be expected - I am using a general purpose distribution and it makes sense for the default scripts to have this result and to expect the person installing it to go ahead and take a few minutes to customise the scripts and get rid of the spurious commands , either by deletion or simply commenting them out .
The only complaint I have in that setting is that it does , on occasion , seem unreasonably difficult to track down the scripts in question , as if the builders of the distro never even thought of anyone wanting to clean the thing up post-install .
This attitude , or my perception of it , grates the nerves , it is just shoddy engineering .
Error messages should NOT be normal , and an OS installation can not be said to be complete until they are all cleaned up .
When the user sees an error message they should be able to have confidence it is a real error .
Instead they learn that it is 'normal ' to have spurious error messages all over the place , they learn to ignore them , and then when there is a real error message that does need attention - it is ignored too .
On the EeePC , however , it is not excusable at all .
This is a very specialised distribution created * specifically * for this hardware .
There is no excuse whatsoever for these scripts not to have been cleaned up so that they produce no error messages on their intended hardware before the image was burned , period .
Another very annoying feature of that particular Operating System is that it does not support swap partitions .
This really boils down to the same problem - the company producing it obviously couldnt be bothered to budget just a handful of hours with someone familiar with linux for this thing !
More specifically , it appears that Asus was told by the manufacturer of the SSD used that it should absolutely never be used for virtual memory .
This advice could only have come with someone that is familiar with Windows , but not with computers in general and certainly not with linux specifically .
SSDs do have a limited number of read/write cycles , you see , and Windows WILL thrash virtual memory whenever given it , without rhyme or reason , it just insists on rewriting it fairly often .
Allowing Windows to use an SSD for virtual memory is a very bad idea .
But Linux does not do this .
Linux is much more conservative in access .
I can run my own custom distro on the same machine , format just enough of the SSD for swap space as I need to have for it to 'suspend to disk ' and that partition has NEVER been touched otherwise .
That partition will be the last part of the SSD to run out , not the first .
But I do , literally , have to roll my own OS to get this working .
It is a job that should have only needed to be done once , by Asus , and burned to their image , but they apparently couldnt be bothered so as a result every single customer has to learn to roll their own OS or do without one of the most critical features the machine is capable of !
IMOP it is little things like this that are holding Linux-based OS from market success .
It has little or nothing to do with pretty graphics and time-wasters , every modern distro has more than enough of that .
It has much more to do with basic failures to put in the minimum of polish and sanity checking to produce a polished product .
No matter how good the generic core you start with , producing a proper operating system for a given piece of hardware is always going to involve some customisation like this .
It is done with Windows all the time , and usually in a reasonably competent way .
I have yet to see a single OEM windows install boot up with dozens of error messages because it is just trying to load drivers for every piece of hardware in the windows driver database for instance .
Yet when they dabble in Linux that is exactly the kind of thing they do , reliably .
Again , this is not rocket science , you dont have to retain Linus Thorvalds for months to do it , heck , you dont even need a programmer .
I would be happy to do it myself for a very reasonable wage , and in any major city there are probably hundreds if not thousands of teenagers that would do it for even less .
So why is it never done ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are almost right, partly.
:)For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC.
All the GUI gives you is success or failure.
Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs used to set up the connection, several of which produce error messages in normal operation.
I have an EeePC and I know *precisely* what you are talking about.
I agree it is bad, but I disagree with your solution entirely.
This problem is amenable to a much simpler solution, there is no need for any drastic architectural changes.
The basic architecture here is sound, there is no reason why the GUI-box should not just report success or failure and leave the actual diagnostic output to another box that the user only has cause to invoke if there is a problem.
The real problem here is that errors are reported even when nothing is wrong.
The best I can see this is due quite simply to the fact that no one is willing to pay one or two employees (they dont have to be highly skilled, just computer literate enough to track down scripts and edit them) to finish the job when they make a distribution.
In this case, there are error on the EeePC that are normal all over the place, not just in this one box, but bloody everywhere.
They are caused by using generic scripts, designed to work on an extraordinarily broad range of different installations, with no customisation.
It is a relatively tiny amount of work to go through these scripts, figure out which lines are actually unneeded and inappropriate on *this* distribution, and remove them.
Simple as that.
Now, when I fire up a newly installed white-box, I see a lot of similar spurious error messages scroll by.
This is to be expected - I am using a general purpose distribution and it makes sense for the default scripts to have this result and to expect the person installing it to go ahead and take a few minutes to customise the scripts and get rid of the spurious commands, either by deletion or simply commenting them out.
The only complaint I have in that setting is that it does, on occasion, seem unreasonably difficult to track down the scripts in question, as if the builders of the distro never even thought of anyone wanting to clean the thing up post-install.
This attitude, or my perception of it, grates the nerves, it is just shoddy engineering.
Error messages should NOT be normal, and an OS installation cannot be said to be complete until they are all cleaned up.
When the user sees an error message they should be able to have confidence it is a real error.
Instead they learn that it is 'normal' to have spurious error messages all over the place, they learn to ignore them, and then when there is a real error message that does need attention - it is ignored too.
On the EeePC, however, it is not excusable at all.
This is a very specialised distribution created *specifically* for this hardware.
There is no excuse whatsoever for these scripts not to have been cleaned up so that they produce no error messages on their intended hardware before the image was burned, period.
Another very annoying feature of that particular Operating System is that it does not support swap partitions.
This really boils down to the same problem - the company producing it obviously couldnt be bothered to budget just a handful of hours with someone familiar with linux for this thing!
More specifically, it appears that Asus was told by the manufacturer of the SSD used that it should absolutely never be used for virtual memory.
This advice could only have come with someone that is familiar with Windows, but not with computers in general and certainly not with linux specifically.
SSDs do have a limited number of read/write cycles, you see, and Windows WILL thrash virtual memory whenever given it, without rhyme or reason, it just insists on rewriting it fairly often.
Allowing Windows to use an SSD for virtual memory is a very bad idea.
But Linux does not do this.
Linux is much more conservative in access.
I can run my own custom distro on the same machine, format just enough of the SSD for swap space as I need to have for it to 'suspend to disk' and that partition has NEVER been touched otherwise.
That partition will be the last part of the SSD to run out, not the first.
But I do, literally, have to roll my own OS to get this working.
It is a job that should have only needed to be done once, by Asus, and burned to their image, but they apparently couldnt be bothered so as a result every single customer has to learn to roll their own OS or do without one of the most critical features the machine is capable of!
IMOP it is little things like this that are holding Linux-based OS from market success.
It has little or nothing to do with pretty graphics and time-wasters, every modern distro has more than enough of that.
It has much more to do with basic failures to put in the minimum of polish and sanity checking to produce a polished product.
No matter how good the generic core you start with, producing a proper operating system for a given piece of hardware is always going to involve some customisation like this.
It is done with Windows all the time, and usually in a reasonably competent way.
I have yet to see a single OEM windows install boot up with dozens of error messages because it is just trying to load drivers for every piece of hardware in the windows driver database for instance.
Yet when they dabble in Linux that is exactly the kind of thing they do, reliably.
Again, this is not rocket science, you dont have to retain Linus Thorvalds for months to do it, heck, you dont even need a programmer.
I would be happy to do it myself for a very reasonable wage, and in any major city there are probably hundreds if not thousands of teenagers that would do it for even less.
So why is it never done? 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916</id>
	<title>Pirates</title>
	<author>Evro</author>
	<datestamp>1262031960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now that "real" pirates are back on the world stage, maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate?  I, at least, was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that " real " pirates are back on the world stage , maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate ?
I , at least , was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that "real" pirates are back on the world stage, maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate?
I, at least, was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571174</id>
	<title>Re:Be careful what you demand Microsoft...</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1262016360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>But perhaps the measures are too strong in today's "Linux curious" environment.</i> </p><p>It took one month in release for Win 7 to take a 5\% share of the global desktop.</p><p>Five times that of Linux.</p><p> <a href="http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=42&amp;qptimeframe=D&amp;qpcustom=Windows+7&amp;qpsp=3941&amp;qpnp=73&amp;sample=10" title="hitslink.com">Windows 7 Breaks 5\% in Daily Tracking - Mac Share Drops<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.15\% in November</a> [hitslink.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But perhaps the measures are too strong in today 's " Linux curious " environment .
It took one month in release for Win 7 to take a 5 \ % share of the global desktop.Five times that of Linux .
Windows 7 Breaks 5 \ % in Daily Tracking - Mac Share Drops .15 \ % in November [ hitslink.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But perhaps the measures are too strong in today's "Linux curious" environment.
It took one month in release for Win 7 to take a 5\% share of the global desktop.Five times that of Linux.
Windows 7 Breaks 5\% in Daily Tracking - Mac Share Drops .15\% in November [hitslink.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569234</id>
	<title>Re:Graphics</title>
	<author>Zemran</author>
	<datestamp>1261993680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>copyrighted graphics ???<br>copyrighted text ???</p><p>Sorry Dorothy but this ain't Kansas.  IANACL (I am not a Chinese Lawyer) but I doubt that the broken US concept of copyright will go far in another country, especially one like China.  Plagiarism is seen as a compliment there so M$ would get laughed at if they complained about it.  To say that someone is copying your product is one thing but to say that someone has made their product look like your product is another.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>copyrighted graphics ? ?
? copyrighted text ? ?
? Sorry Dorothy but this ai n't Kansas .
IANACL ( I am not a Chinese Lawyer ) but I doubt that the broken US concept of copyright will go far in another country , especially one like China .
Plagiarism is seen as a compliment there so M $ would get laughed at if they complained about it .
To say that someone is copying your product is one thing but to say that someone has made their product look like your product is another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>copyrighted graphics ??
?copyrighted text ??
?Sorry Dorothy but this ain't Kansas.
IANACL (I am not a Chinese Lawyer) but I doubt that the broken US concept of copyright will go far in another country, especially one like China.
Plagiarism is seen as a compliment there so M$ would get laughed at if they complained about it.
To say that someone is copying your product is one thing but to say that someone has made their product look like your product is another.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570522</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262012460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The EeePC's Linux distribution has all kinds of other problems.</p><p>The basic problem is that Asus had no idea what they were doing. They started off with a custom build of Xandros, which is one of the least standard / typical Linux distributions around. They then stripped out pretty much everything except for the Xandros file manager, including stuff like the window manager, the network configuration system, and pretty much everything else that would have made Xandros worth choosing. The only plausible reason to do this is to reclaim disk space, which they didn't do - the default installation contains a complete copy of KDE 3, but it's disabled by default, and requires some hacking to get at it.</p><p>The main problem is that they wrote their own replacements for the removed Xandros pieces. So we have their abomination of a network manager, which basically just doesn't work properly. They could have installed NetworkManager, or WICD (which actually worked better than NetworkManager at the time), but they didn't.</p><p>Even more bizarre - Xandros is fundamentally based on KDE 3, yet nearly all of the applications are GTK applications. In fact, the only KDE application still present in the default setup is Xandros file manager (which is a horrible file manager - even Nautilus works better), and a couple of Asus's utilities like the aforementioned network manager.</p><p>This isn't something that's unique to Linux systems either. Hardware manufacturers in particular frequently replace Windows functionality with their own, for absolutely no good reason. I've seen plenty of laptops shipping with some horrible wireless network manager, replacing (or sometimes interfering with) the built-in Windows one, and not working nearly as well. Same deal with sound cards (particularly Creative Labs, and Realtek), video cards (Intel particularly, but ATI and nVidia used to do this too).</p><p>Basically, most hardware manufacturers could not write decent software to save their lives. The OS on the EeePC was written by a company that primarily does hardware, and it shows.</p><p>Asus <i>should</i> have done what Dell later did. Pick a standard, popular Linux distribution, and install that. Do the same kind of stuff that you'd usually do with an OEM Windows install - install and set up the appropriate drivers, add / remove whatever software you need, customize the thing a little bit (keeping compatibility with the base OS), and ship that. The shipped OS should be <i>better</i> than you could get by just installing another distribution, not worse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The EeePC 's Linux distribution has all kinds of other problems.The basic problem is that Asus had no idea what they were doing .
They started off with a custom build of Xandros , which is one of the least standard / typical Linux distributions around .
They then stripped out pretty much everything except for the Xandros file manager , including stuff like the window manager , the network configuration system , and pretty much everything else that would have made Xandros worth choosing .
The only plausible reason to do this is to reclaim disk space , which they did n't do - the default installation contains a complete copy of KDE 3 , but it 's disabled by default , and requires some hacking to get at it.The main problem is that they wrote their own replacements for the removed Xandros pieces .
So we have their abomination of a network manager , which basically just does n't work properly .
They could have installed NetworkManager , or WICD ( which actually worked better than NetworkManager at the time ) , but they did n't.Even more bizarre - Xandros is fundamentally based on KDE 3 , yet nearly all of the applications are GTK applications .
In fact , the only KDE application still present in the default setup is Xandros file manager ( which is a horrible file manager - even Nautilus works better ) , and a couple of Asus 's utilities like the aforementioned network manager.This is n't something that 's unique to Linux systems either .
Hardware manufacturers in particular frequently replace Windows functionality with their own , for absolutely no good reason .
I 've seen plenty of laptops shipping with some horrible wireless network manager , replacing ( or sometimes interfering with ) the built-in Windows one , and not working nearly as well .
Same deal with sound cards ( particularly Creative Labs , and Realtek ) , video cards ( Intel particularly , but ATI and nVidia used to do this too ) .Basically , most hardware manufacturers could not write decent software to save their lives .
The OS on the EeePC was written by a company that primarily does hardware , and it shows.Asus should have done what Dell later did .
Pick a standard , popular Linux distribution , and install that .
Do the same kind of stuff that you 'd usually do with an OEM Windows install - install and set up the appropriate drivers , add / remove whatever software you need , customize the thing a little bit ( keeping compatibility with the base OS ) , and ship that .
The shipped OS should be better than you could get by just installing another distribution , not worse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The EeePC's Linux distribution has all kinds of other problems.The basic problem is that Asus had no idea what they were doing.
They started off with a custom build of Xandros, which is one of the least standard / typical Linux distributions around.
They then stripped out pretty much everything except for the Xandros file manager, including stuff like the window manager, the network configuration system, and pretty much everything else that would have made Xandros worth choosing.
The only plausible reason to do this is to reclaim disk space, which they didn't do - the default installation contains a complete copy of KDE 3, but it's disabled by default, and requires some hacking to get at it.The main problem is that they wrote their own replacements for the removed Xandros pieces.
So we have their abomination of a network manager, which basically just doesn't work properly.
They could have installed NetworkManager, or WICD (which actually worked better than NetworkManager at the time), but they didn't.Even more bizarre - Xandros is fundamentally based on KDE 3, yet nearly all of the applications are GTK applications.
In fact, the only KDE application still present in the default setup is Xandros file manager (which is a horrible file manager - even Nautilus works better), and a couple of Asus's utilities like the aforementioned network manager.This isn't something that's unique to Linux systems either.
Hardware manufacturers in particular frequently replace Windows functionality with their own, for absolutely no good reason.
I've seen plenty of laptops shipping with some horrible wireless network manager, replacing (or sometimes interfering with) the built-in Windows one, and not working nearly as well.
Same deal with sound cards (particularly Creative Labs, and Realtek), video cards (Intel particularly, but ATI and nVidia used to do this too).Basically, most hardware manufacturers could not write decent software to save their lives.
The OS on the EeePC was written by a company that primarily does hardware, and it shows.Asus should have done what Dell later did.
Pick a standard, popular Linux distribution, and install that.
Do the same kind of stuff that you'd usually do with an OEM Windows install - install and set up the appropriate drivers, add / remove whatever software you need, customize the thing a little bit (keeping compatibility with the base OS), and ship that.
The shipped OS should be better than you could get by just installing another distribution, not worse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568906</id>
	<title>and the blue screen of death?</title>
	<author>mugurel</author>
	<datestamp>1262031780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>a cron job?</htmltext>
<tokenext>a cron job ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a cron job?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30579624</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Rennt</author>
	<datestamp>1262027220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream.</p></div><p>This is not a design flaw. Seriously. Read up on how UNIX was designed.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC. All the GUI gives you is success or failure. Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs used to set up the connection, several of which produce error messages in normal operation.</p></div><p>The default EeePC Linux install is bloody awful, but I see what you are getting at. The thing is *I* find the "confusing blither" extremely helpful - at the very least you have something you can google.
</p><p>The Mac interface guidelines have some useful suggestions, but is as much about style as anything else.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess , you can pass in a list of arguments , but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream.This is not a design flaw .
Seriously. Read up on how UNIX was designed.For a painful example of this problem , make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC .
All the GUI gives you is success or failure .
Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs used to set up the connection , several of which produce error messages in normal operation.The default EeePC Linux install is bloody awful , but I see what you are getting at .
The thing is * I * find the " confusing blither " extremely helpful - at the very least you have something you can google .
The Mac interface guidelines have some useful suggestions , but is as much about style as anything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream.This is not a design flaw.
Seriously. Read up on how UNIX was designed.For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC.
All the GUI gives you is success or failure.
Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs used to set up the connection, several of which produce error messages in normal operation.The default EeePC Linux install is bloody awful, but I see what you are getting at.
The thing is *I* find the "confusing blither" extremely helpful - at the very least you have something you can google.
The Mac interface guidelines have some useful suggestions, but is as much about style as anything else.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828</id>
	<title>Graphics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261943700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't read Chinese, and I'm not about to download that--but is the point supposed to be that pirating windows is illegal and repainting Ubuntu is not?</p><p>Here's the thing: based on the screenshots, it's virtually certain that they used the copyrighted graphics that come with Windows to make this.  Depending on how thorough they are, they may have used a fair amount of copyrighted text, as well.</p><p>As such, they are still "pirates".  Why not just keep pirating Windows?  What does this accomplish for them, exactly?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't read Chinese , and I 'm not about to download that--but is the point supposed to be that pirating windows is illegal and repainting Ubuntu is not ? Here 's the thing : based on the screenshots , it 's virtually certain that they used the copyrighted graphics that come with Windows to make this .
Depending on how thorough they are , they may have used a fair amount of copyrighted text , as well.As such , they are still " pirates " .
Why not just keep pirating Windows ?
What does this accomplish for them , exactly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't read Chinese, and I'm not about to download that--but is the point supposed to be that pirating windows is illegal and repainting Ubuntu is not?Here's the thing: based on the screenshots, it's virtually certain that they used the copyrighted graphics that come with Windows to make this.
Depending on how thorough they are, they may have used a fair amount of copyrighted text, as well.As such, they are still "pirates".
Why not just keep pirating Windows?
What does this accomplish for them, exactly?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30576840</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>cecom</author>
	<datestamp>1262001420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are correct about free GUIs being generally bad (the explanation is simple - good usability design is expensive and thus often incompatible with "free").

</p><p>However your generalization about the "Unix design flaw" is frankly completely ridiculous. Unix and POSIX may have many design flaws, but lack of IPC mechanisms isn't one of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are correct about free GUIs being generally bad ( the explanation is simple - good usability design is expensive and thus often incompatible with " free " ) .
However your generalization about the " Unix design flaw " is frankly completely ridiculous .
Unix and POSIX may have many design flaws , but lack of IPC mechanisms is n't one of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are correct about free GUIs being generally bad (the explanation is simple - good usability design is expensive and thus often incompatible with "free").
However your generalization about the "Unix design flaw" is frankly completely ridiculous.
Unix and POSIX may have many design flaws, but lack of IPC mechanisms isn't one of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568774</id>
	<title>Someone call the woodsman!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261942980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>User: What a pretty GUI you have.<br>YImf: All the better to confuse you with, my dear.<br>U: And what strange fonts you have.<br>Y: All the better to break your layouts with, my dear.<br>U: And what a lack of app support you have.<br>Y: All the better to irritate you with, my dear.<br>U: And what terrible hardware support you have.<br>Y: All the better to eat up your time with, my dear!</p><p>Just then the hunter entered the house and cut the YImf right down the belly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>User : What a pretty GUI you have.YImf : All the better to confuse you with , my dear.U : And what strange fonts you have.Y : All the better to break your layouts with , my dear.U : And what a lack of app support you have.Y : All the better to irritate you with , my dear.U : And what terrible hardware support you have.Y : All the better to eat up your time with , my dear ! Just then the hunter entered the house and cut the YImf right down the belly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>User: What a pretty GUI you have.YImf: All the better to confuse you with, my dear.U: And what strange fonts you have.Y: All the better to break your layouts with, my dear.U: And what a lack of app support you have.Y: All the better to irritate you with, my dear.U: And what terrible hardware support you have.Y: All the better to eat up your time with, my dear!Just then the hunter entered the house and cut the YImf right down the belly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569026</id>
	<title>This actually makes sense...</title>
	<author>AnonymouseUser</author>
	<datestamp>1262033520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, it does make sense. Apparently the demand for Windows on-the-cheap is high in China, so in order to provide what the customer wants, at the price point they want, and without pirating XP, they came up with this. Everything is legit and everyone is happy (well, everyone except MS).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it does make sense .
Apparently the demand for Windows on-the-cheap is high in China , so in order to provide what the customer wants , at the price point they want , and without pirating XP , they came up with this .
Everything is legit and everyone is happy ( well , everyone except MS ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it does make sense.
Apparently the demand for Windows on-the-cheap is high in China, so in order to provide what the customer wants, at the price point they want, and without pirating XP, they came up with this.
Everything is legit and everyone is happy (well, everyone except MS).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570708</id>
	<title>Oh yeah another Linux/Windows flame war</title>
	<author>SQL\_SAM</author>
	<datestamp>1262013840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I could only care.  "It's a Linux OS that looks like a Windows OS!!!".  It must be Christmas time because Slashdot is trying to give a its slashkiddies something to wet their beds about again *yawn*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I could only care .
" It 's a Linux OS that looks like a Windows OS ! ! ! " .
It must be Christmas time because Slashdot is trying to give a its slashkiddies something to wet their beds about again * yawn *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I could only care.
"It's a Linux OS that looks like a Windows OS!!!".
It must be Christmas time because Slashdot is trying to give a its slashkiddies something to wet their beds about again *yawn*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568980</id>
	<title>well...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262032920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>its not complete without BSOD copy too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>its not complete without BSOD copy too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its not complete without BSOD copy too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569842</id>
	<title>Easy to integrate WINE apps into a Gnome XP.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262006100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Win32 applications translated through WINE would appear a lot better if Gnome XP made it all look the same.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Win32 applications translated through WINE would appear a lot better if Gnome XP made it all look the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Win32 applications translated through WINE would appear a lot better if Gnome XP made it all look the same.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571584</id>
	<title>I don't understand...</title>
	<author>Thelasko</author>
	<datestamp>1262018520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What happens when you click the Internet Explorer icon?  Does it open Firefox?  What happens when you click on the Windows Media Player Icon?  Does it open VLC?<br> <br>
I'm confused...</htmltext>
<tokenext>What happens when you click the Internet Explorer icon ?
Does it open Firefox ?
What happens when you click on the Windows Media Player Icon ?
Does it open VLC ?
I 'm confused.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What happens when you click the Internet Explorer icon?
Does it open Firefox?
What happens when you click on the Windows Media Player Icon?
Does it open VLC?
I'm confused...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570554</id>
	<title>Why is this being portrayed as something 'bad'?</title>
	<author>popo</author>
	<datestamp>1262012700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I read this post I saw the words "pirates" and assumed that there was something illicit about what was being done here.</p><p>From what I can see, this looks like an excellent, and legitimate redesign of the OS -- which may ultimately help Linux adoption.</p><p>The question is -- how far does the cloning go?  The desktop is one thing, but does it extend to the entire OS?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I read this post I saw the words " pirates " and assumed that there was something illicit about what was being done here.From what I can see , this looks like an excellent , and legitimate redesign of the OS -- which may ultimately help Linux adoption.The question is -- how far does the cloning go ?
The desktop is one thing , but does it extend to the entire OS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I read this post I saw the words "pirates" and assumed that there was something illicit about what was being done here.From what I can see, this looks like an excellent, and legitimate redesign of the OS -- which may ultimately help Linux adoption.The question is -- how far does the cloning go?
The desktop is one thing, but does it extend to the entire OS?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</id>
	<title>Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI right.</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1261991160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The typical "open source" solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable, with "skins" or "themes".  This is an admission of failure.
</p><p>
Blender, the animation system, is about to do this.  All 3D animation systems are complex, but Blender has an unusually confused GUI, with changes in each release and out of sync documentation.  So, in the next release, 2.5, Blender will support "themes", plus some scheme for custom Python code to rework the GUI.  Now the developers can blame the user.
</p><p>
The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI.  Input is graphical, but output is in a text window, because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application.  This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream.  "exit" should have had "argc" and "argv" parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller.
</p><p>
For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC.  All the GUI gives you is success or failure.  Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs  used to set up the connection, several of which produce error messages in normal operation.
</p><p>
For better or worse, the Mac got this right back in 1984, and it's still worth reading the Macintosh User Interface Guidelines.  Two rules often forgotten: "You should never have to tell the computer something it already knows", and "An alert box consists of a sentence explaining the problem, and a sentence suggesting what to do about it."  The idea that you should never have to tell the computer something it already knows means that it's not acceptable to make the user copy information from one place to another.  The Linux community does not get this at all, and the Windows community sometimes forgets it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The typical " open source " solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable , with " skins " or " themes " .
This is an admission of failure .
Blender , the animation system , is about to do this .
All 3D animation systems are complex , but Blender has an unusually confused GUI , with changes in each release and out of sync documentation .
So , in the next release , 2.5 , Blender will support " themes " , plus some scheme for custom Python code to rework the GUI .
Now the developers can blame the user .
The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI .
Input is graphical , but output is in a text window , because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application .
This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess , you can pass in a list of arguments , but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream .
" exit " should have had " argc " and " argv " parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller .
For a painful example of this problem , make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC .
All the GUI gives you is success or failure .
Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs used to set up the connection , several of which produce error messages in normal operation .
For better or worse , the Mac got this right back in 1984 , and it 's still worth reading the Macintosh User Interface Guidelines .
Two rules often forgotten : " You should never have to tell the computer something it already knows " , and " An alert box consists of a sentence explaining the problem , and a sentence suggesting what to do about it .
" The idea that you should never have to tell the computer something it already knows means that it 's not acceptable to make the user copy information from one place to another .
The Linux community does not get this at all , and the Windows community sometimes forgets it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The typical "open source" solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable, with "skins" or "themes".
This is an admission of failure.
Blender, the animation system, is about to do this.
All 3D animation systems are complex, but Blender has an unusually confused GUI, with changes in each release and out of sync documentation.
So, in the next release, 2.5, Blender will support "themes", plus some scheme for custom Python code to rework the GUI.
Now the developers can blame the user.
The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI.
Input is graphical, but output is in a text window, because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application.
This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream.
"exit" should have had "argc" and "argv" parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller.
For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC.
All the GUI gives you is success or failure.
Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs  used to set up the connection, several of which produce error messages in normal operation.
For better or worse, the Mac got this right back in 1984, and it's still worth reading the Macintosh User Interface Guidelines.
Two rules often forgotten: "You should never have to tell the computer something it already knows", and "An alert box consists of a sentence explaining the problem, and a sentence suggesting what to do about it.
"  The idea that you should never have to tell the computer something it already knows means that it's not acceptable to make the user copy information from one place to another.
The Linux community does not get this at all, and the Windows community sometimes forgets it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572082</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1262020980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I straight-up-gangsta'ed photoshop!"</p><p>That's why we shouldn't invite twenty somethings to make up new words.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I straight-up-gangsta'ed photoshop !
" That 's why we should n't invite twenty somethings to make up new words .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I straight-up-gangsta'ed photoshop!
"That's why we shouldn't invite twenty somethings to make up new words.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30577810</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates</title>
	<author>Erikderzweite</author>
	<datestamp>1262009100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This "pirate" thing exists much longer than you think. People who make unauthorized copies of commercial books were called pirates since at least 17th century (Grimmelshausen comes to mind ranting about pirates copying and selling his books). Back then there were real pirates as well, but people could tell the ones from the others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This " pirate " thing exists much longer than you think .
People who make unauthorized copies of commercial books were called pirates since at least 17th century ( Grimmelshausen comes to mind ranting about pirates copying and selling his books ) .
Back then there were real pirates as well , but people could tell the ones from the others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This "pirate" thing exists much longer than you think.
People who make unauthorized copies of commercial books were called pirates since at least 17th century (Grimmelshausen comes to mind ranting about pirates copying and selling his books).
Back then there were real pirates as well, but people could tell the ones from the others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571668</id>
	<title>Re:Graphics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262018940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Plagiarism is seen as a compliment there</p> </div><p>imitation is the sincerest form of flattery</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Plagiarism is seen as a compliment there imitation is the sincerest form of flattery</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Plagiarism is seen as a compliment there imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570544</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262012580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I actually use blender and maya and 3ds, dont compare them like that, you're making the same mistake, blender's gui is still evolving, just for dinosaurs like you that dont want to try even the slightest change. I use blender more because it's heavy on the keyboard shortcuts, with the others I need frequent breaks to rest my hand because everything is dont by point and click, simple? yes! fast? no.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually use blender and maya and 3ds , dont compare them like that , you 're making the same mistake , blender 's gui is still evolving , just for dinosaurs like you that dont want to try even the slightest change .
I use blender more because it 's heavy on the keyboard shortcuts , with the others I need frequent breaks to rest my hand because everything is dont by point and click , simple ?
yes ! fast ?
no .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually use blender and maya and 3ds, dont compare them like that, you're making the same mistake, blender's gui is still evolving, just for dinosaurs like you that dont want to try even the slightest change.
I use blender more because it's heavy on the keyboard shortcuts, with the others I need frequent breaks to rest my hand because everything is dont by point and click, simple?
yes! fast?
no.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569768</id>
	<title>Ahhhh!!!!</title>
	<author>drewsup</author>
	<datestamp>1262004840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Kill IT! Kill it with fire!!!!! Burn the Abomination!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Kill IT !
Kill it with fire ! ! ! ! !
Burn the Abomination !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kill IT!
Kill it with fire!!!!!
Burn the Abomination!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30580304</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Quantumstate</author>
	<datestamp>1262082120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do you have a problem with Network Manager?  With me in the options dialog there is a checkbox with "connect automatically" written next to it.  If this is checked then I automatically get connected to the network when available.  I am using Ubuntu 9.10.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do you have a problem with Network Manager ?
With me in the options dialog there is a checkbox with " connect automatically " written next to it .
If this is checked then I automatically get connected to the network when available .
I am using Ubuntu 9.10 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do you have a problem with Network Manager?
With me in the options dialog there is a checkbox with "connect automatically" written next to it.
If this is checked then I automatically get connected to the network when available.
I am using Ubuntu 9.10.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568826</id>
	<title>Waiting for the KDE version.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261943640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Flame wars aside, I'm just getting used to KDE4, now I have to learn gnome? No thank you sir.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flame wars aside , I 'm just getting used to KDE4 , now I have to learn gnome ?
No thank you sir .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flame wars aside, I'm just getting used to KDE4, now I have to learn gnome?
No thank you sir.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30576950</id>
	<title>Gui showing CLI info</title>
	<author>Well-Fed Troll</author>
	<datestamp>1262002380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parsers are an unnecessary added layer of complexity.  <br>What should happen is that the application returns a machine readable responses which is is then output by either a command line display algorithm or a GUI display algorithm.</p><p>I question whether the old unix concept of input and output streams has kept up with our user interface standards.  I'm not saying they're a bad idea, I just think they could use a little expansion today especially how to set them up.  I also think if we should have a packet oriented interface standard layered on top of the stream interface.  Unix actually does this, but not for binary streams, only text streams delimited by carriage returns (see AWK).<br>Alas, Unix will continue to be unix long after we mere mortals are all dust.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Parsers are an unnecessary added layer of complexity .
What should happen is that the application returns a machine readable responses which is is then output by either a command line display algorithm or a GUI display algorithm.I question whether the old unix concept of input and output streams has kept up with our user interface standards .
I 'm not saying they 're a bad idea , I just think they could use a little expansion today especially how to set them up .
I also think if we should have a packet oriented interface standard layered on top of the stream interface .
Unix actually does this , but not for binary streams , only text streams delimited by carriage returns ( see AWK ) .Alas , Unix will continue to be unix long after we mere mortals are all dust .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parsers are an unnecessary added layer of complexity.
What should happen is that the application returns a machine readable responses which is is then output by either a command line display algorithm or a GUI display algorithm.I question whether the old unix concept of input and output streams has kept up with our user interface standards.
I'm not saying they're a bad idea, I just think they could use a little expansion today especially how to set them up.
I also think if we should have a packet oriented interface standard layered on top of the stream interface.
Unix actually does this, but not for binary streams, only text streams delimited by carriage returns (see AWK).Alas, Unix will continue to be unix long after we mere mortals are all dust.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30575402</id>
	<title>Sounds Like XPde</title>
	<author>subsolar2</author>
	<datestamp>1261993320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds like the XPde <a href="http://www.xpde.com/index.php" title="xpde.com">http://www.xpde.com/index.php</a> [xpde.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like the XPde http : //www.xpde.com/index.php [ xpde.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like the XPde http://www.xpde.com/index.php [xpde.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569892</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1262006640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The typical "open source" solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable, with "skins" or "themes". This is an admission of failure.</p> </div><p>But in Open Source, allowing the community to create a working GUI is a valid idea.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI. Input is graphical, but output is in a text window, because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application. This comes from a design flaw of UNIX</p></div><p>Uh, what? The output from your programs can be as structured as you like. For one thing, there are multiple output streams available, error and output. For another, while the output from each needs to be human-readable, there's no reason it can't also be machine-readable. For example, in AIX, IBM includes unique codes with all error messages. Those codes mean little or nothing to a human, but can be looked up in a database. There's no reason why Unix programs which will be wrapped by other programs can't do this, and in fact they often do. Script intelligence is often sufficient to get rather complex GUI operation from the output of a simple utility.</p><p>In addition, most Unix applications seem to heavily leverage shared libraries, perhaps because the Free Software and Open Source communities which are very much more a part of Unix than Windows are better-able to make use of them so long as their licenses are compatible. And, given the Open nature of the programs we're talking about, their functions can be distilled as libraries. A poor screen-scraper is not a fault of the Unix system, but of the implementor. Most of the time, the libraries the original utility are based upon are available to the programmer, who can gain the benefit of code reuse <em>without</em> taking advantage of Unix's redirection.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>For better or worse, the Mac got this right back in 1984, and it's still worth reading the Macintosh User Interface Guidelines.</p></div><p>Too bad Apple has forgotten almost everything they knew back then...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The typical " open source " solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable , with " skins " or " themes " .
This is an admission of failure .
But in Open Source , allowing the community to create a working GUI is a valid idea.The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI .
Input is graphical , but output is in a text window , because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application .
This comes from a design flaw of UNIXUh , what ?
The output from your programs can be as structured as you like .
For one thing , there are multiple output streams available , error and output .
For another , while the output from each needs to be human-readable , there 's no reason it ca n't also be machine-readable .
For example , in AIX , IBM includes unique codes with all error messages .
Those codes mean little or nothing to a human , but can be looked up in a database .
There 's no reason why Unix programs which will be wrapped by other programs ca n't do this , and in fact they often do .
Script intelligence is often sufficient to get rather complex GUI operation from the output of a simple utility.In addition , most Unix applications seem to heavily leverage shared libraries , perhaps because the Free Software and Open Source communities which are very much more a part of Unix than Windows are better-able to make use of them so long as their licenses are compatible .
And , given the Open nature of the programs we 're talking about , their functions can be distilled as libraries .
A poor screen-scraper is not a fault of the Unix system , but of the implementor .
Most of the time , the libraries the original utility are based upon are available to the programmer , who can gain the benefit of code reuse without taking advantage of Unix 's redirection.For better or worse , the Mac got this right back in 1984 , and it 's still worth reading the Macintosh User Interface Guidelines.Too bad Apple has forgotten almost everything they knew back then.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The typical "open source" solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable, with "skins" or "themes".
This is an admission of failure.
But in Open Source, allowing the community to create a working GUI is a valid idea.The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI.
Input is graphical, but output is in a text window, because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application.
This comes from a design flaw of UNIXUh, what?
The output from your programs can be as structured as you like.
For one thing, there are multiple output streams available, error and output.
For another, while the output from each needs to be human-readable, there's no reason it can't also be machine-readable.
For example, in AIX, IBM includes unique codes with all error messages.
Those codes mean little or nothing to a human, but can be looked up in a database.
There's no reason why Unix programs which will be wrapped by other programs can't do this, and in fact they often do.
Script intelligence is often sufficient to get rather complex GUI operation from the output of a simple utility.In addition, most Unix applications seem to heavily leverage shared libraries, perhaps because the Free Software and Open Source communities which are very much more a part of Unix than Windows are better-able to make use of them so long as their licenses are compatible.
And, given the Open nature of the programs we're talking about, their functions can be distilled as libraries.
A poor screen-scraper is not a fault of the Unix system, but of the implementor.
Most of the time, the libraries the original utility are based upon are available to the programmer, who can gain the benefit of code reuse without taking advantage of Unix's redirection.For better or worse, the Mac got this right back in 1984, and it's still worth reading the Macintosh User Interface Guidelines.Too bad Apple has forgotten almost everything they knew back then...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569106</id>
	<title>Cue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261991580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's <b>cue</b> you fucking clueless cocksmoking buttfucker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's cue you fucking clueless cocksmoking buttfucker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's cue you fucking clueless cocksmoking buttfucker.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569608</id>
	<title>why it looks like XP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262002200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So a friend who's working on the Incognito LiveCD project have got news from people being beaten and jailed by police in china. And how did they got discovered? Well, they used the LiveCD at a internet caf&#233; and the owner realized that that's not windows and called the police.<br>Having linux looking like windows could be a privacy feature.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So a friend who 's working on the Incognito LiveCD project have got news from people being beaten and jailed by police in china .
And how did they got discovered ?
Well , they used the LiveCD at a internet caf   and the owner realized that that 's not windows and called the police.Having linux looking like windows could be a privacy feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So a friend who's working on the Incognito LiveCD project have got news from people being beaten and jailed by police in china.
And how did they got discovered?
Well, they used the LiveCD at a internet café and the owner realized that that's not windows and called the police.Having linux looking like windows could be a privacy feature.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572290</id>
	<title>Re:Someone call the woodsman!</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1262022000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I see, the old 'Windows is easy and Linux isn't' misconception again. How about a race? On one side you have a Linux box and you have to configure, build, and install an application from a source tarball and on the other side, you have to clean up an infected Windows box.<br><br>Guess which one will probably take up more of your time. hint: it does not begin with Win.<br><br>I've seen it over and over where developers will zing me for how much time it may take me to do some strange experiment on a Linux box when they may not even be able to do it on their Windows box or, they'd have to go out and purchase software( and fill all the paperwork for that ) and install all the software when they get it themselves. Or what's worst, they'll spend way more time fixing Windows Registry fiasco's and dealing with anti-virus issues.  Every time, they don't see their own time spend dealing with maintaining Windows as an expense of using the system but they see me tracking down an added library package to get a task completed as unproductive. They will often use this as an excuse to say that Linux takes more time to use than Windows so they're sticking with Windows.<br><br>"ignorance is bliss" as they say or maybe it's "you can't teach an old dog new tricks". Whatever it is which keeps these people from seeing the costs of running on the Microsoft treadmill, I do see more and more younger people willing to try this Linux stuff.<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>I see , the old 'Windows is easy and Linux is n't ' misconception again .
How about a race ?
On one side you have a Linux box and you have to configure , build , and install an application from a source tarball and on the other side , you have to clean up an infected Windows box.Guess which one will probably take up more of your time .
hint : it does not begin with Win.I 've seen it over and over where developers will zing me for how much time it may take me to do some strange experiment on a Linux box when they may not even be able to do it on their Windows box or , they 'd have to go out and purchase software ( and fill all the paperwork for that ) and install all the software when they get it themselves .
Or what 's worst , they 'll spend way more time fixing Windows Registry fiasco 's and dealing with anti-virus issues .
Every time , they do n't see their own time spend dealing with maintaining Windows as an expense of using the system but they see me tracking down an added library package to get a task completed as unproductive .
They will often use this as an excuse to say that Linux takes more time to use than Windows so they 're sticking with Windows .
" ignorance is bliss " as they say or maybe it 's " you ca n't teach an old dog new tricks " .
Whatever it is which keeps these people from seeing the costs of running on the Microsoft treadmill , I do see more and more younger people willing to try this Linux stuff.LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see, the old 'Windows is easy and Linux isn't' misconception again.
How about a race?
On one side you have a Linux box and you have to configure, build, and install an application from a source tarball and on the other side, you have to clean up an infected Windows box.Guess which one will probably take up more of your time.
hint: it does not begin with Win.I've seen it over and over where developers will zing me for how much time it may take me to do some strange experiment on a Linux box when they may not even be able to do it on their Windows box or, they'd have to go out and purchase software( and fill all the paperwork for that ) and install all the software when they get it themselves.
Or what's worst, they'll spend way more time fixing Windows Registry fiasco's and dealing with anti-virus issues.
Every time, they don't see their own time spend dealing with maintaining Windows as an expense of using the system but they see me tracking down an added library package to get a task completed as unproductive.
They will often use this as an excuse to say that Linux takes more time to use than Windows so they're sticking with Windows.
"ignorance is bliss" as they say or maybe it's "you can't teach an old dog new tricks".
Whatever it is which keeps these people from seeing the costs of running on the Microsoft treadmill, I do see more and more younger people willing to try this Linux stuff.LoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569936</id>
	<title>Re:I actually looked</title>
	<author>Teun</author>
	<datestamp>1262007300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah before you know people could get used to a solid OS<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah before you know people could get used to a solid OS : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah before you know people could get used to a solid OS :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30574548</id>
	<title>Wasted Time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262032140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chinese have a lot of free time to waste</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese have a lot of free time to waste</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese have a lot of free time to waste</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571522</id>
	<title>They don't seem to comply to GPL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262018220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I visited the website and saw no apparent link to the source. After all, Ubuntu is based on GPL license, which requires its derivative work to comply as well. This time again is another instance of prirate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I visited the website and saw no apparent link to the source .
After all , Ubuntu is based on GPL license , which requires its derivative work to comply as well .
This time again is another instance of prirate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I visited the website and saw no apparent link to the source.
After all, Ubuntu is based on GPL license, which requires its derivative work to comply as well.
This time again is another instance of prirate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569378</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261997340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now that "real" pirates are back on the world stage, maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate?  I, at least, was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.</p></div><p>No, your first impression was right. "Ubuntu" is actually a common type of boat used by Chinese Pirates, and "XP" is the name of a naval vessel of the Chinese Government. The pirates are trying to trick merchant ships into believing that their vessels are the equivalent of the "Coast Guard" so that they can rape, murder, and steal from them much more effectively.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that " real " pirates are back on the world stage , maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate ?
I , at least , was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.No , your first impression was right .
" Ubuntu " is actually a common type of boat used by Chinese Pirates , and " XP " is the name of a naval vessel of the Chinese Government .
The pirates are trying to trick merchant ships into believing that their vessels are the equivalent of the " Coast Guard " so that they can rape , murder , and steal from them much more effectively .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that "real" pirates are back on the world stage, maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate?
I, at least, was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.No, your first impression was right.
"Ubuntu" is actually a common type of boat used by Chinese Pirates, and "XP" is the name of a naval vessel of the Chinese Government.
The pirates are trying to trick merchant ships into believing that their vessels are the equivalent of the "Coast Guard" so that they can rape, murder, and steal from them much more effectively.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569958</id>
	<title>Windows 8</title>
	<author>greekBruin</author>
	<datestamp>1262007660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It'd be news if it looked like Windows 8 (yes, eight).</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 'd be news if it looked like Windows 8 ( yes , eight ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It'd be news if it looked like Windows 8 (yes, eight).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570552</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262012700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Err, Blender GUI created by artists? That sure explains it, how about let the developers do it instead or the people that specialize in it.</p><p>(Fact: The end user doesn't know what he/she wants, the marketing guys do.)</p><p>Blender is quite counter-intuitive with an awesomely buggy interface. Sure I'm all for another direction than the traditional window menu GUIs in use, but when you create a GUI consisting exclusively of buttons you've gone too far in the button direction. An userfriendly interface does NOT have a learning curve, it's simply logical and well organized (customization is not a criteria).<br>Take MS Office ribbon, I never really use that suite but first time I did a few months ago<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) , I had zero problem of finding the properties I was looking for, not talking about font color. Best of all it takes up very little space, in comparison to Blender.</p><p>But since the key-feature in Blender is keyboard input (from the unix console fanboys side) I doubt they'll deviate from their principles effectively leaving the application in the amateur corner despite the extensive plugin support.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Err , Blender GUI created by artists ?
That sure explains it , how about let the developers do it instead or the people that specialize in it .
( Fact : The end user does n't know what he/she wants , the marketing guys do .
) Blender is quite counter-intuitive with an awesomely buggy interface .
Sure I 'm all for another direction than the traditional window menu GUIs in use , but when you create a GUI consisting exclusively of buttons you 've gone too far in the button direction .
An userfriendly interface does NOT have a learning curve , it 's simply logical and well organized ( customization is not a criteria ) .Take MS Office ribbon , I never really use that suite but first time I did a few months ago : ) , I had zero problem of finding the properties I was looking for , not talking about font color .
Best of all it takes up very little space , in comparison to Blender.But since the key-feature in Blender is keyboard input ( from the unix console fanboys side ) I doubt they 'll deviate from their principles effectively leaving the application in the amateur corner despite the extensive plugin support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Err, Blender GUI created by artists?
That sure explains it, how about let the developers do it instead or the people that specialize in it.
(Fact: The end user doesn't know what he/she wants, the marketing guys do.
)Blender is quite counter-intuitive with an awesomely buggy interface.
Sure I'm all for another direction than the traditional window menu GUIs in use, but when you create a GUI consisting exclusively of buttons you've gone too far in the button direction.
An userfriendly interface does NOT have a learning curve, it's simply logical and well organized (customization is not a criteria).Take MS Office ribbon, I never really use that suite but first time I did a few months ago :) , I had zero problem of finding the properties I was looking for, not talking about font color.
Best of all it takes up very little space, in comparison to Blender.But since the key-feature in Blender is keyboard input (from the unix console fanboys side) I doubt they'll deviate from their principles effectively leaving the application in the amateur corner despite the extensive plugin support.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569204</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Cyberax</author>
	<datestamp>1261992960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI. Input is graphical, but output is in a text window, because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application. This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream. "exit" should have had "argc" and "argv" parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller. "</p><p>From what century are you writing this? 18-th or maybe 19-th, I wager?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI .
Input is graphical , but output is in a text window , because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application .
This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess , you can pass in a list of arguments , but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream .
" exit " should have had " argc " and " argv " parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller .
" From what century are you writing this ?
18-th or maybe 19-th , I wager ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI.
Input is graphical, but output is in a text window, because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application.
This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream.
"exit" should have had "argc" and "argv" parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller.
"From what century are you writing this?
18-th or maybe 19-th, I wager?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569776</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262004900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The typical "open source" solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable, with "skins" or "themes".  This is an admission of failure.</p></div><p>1,590,000 hits when Googling "themes for windows vista"</p><p>2,450,000 hits for "themes for windows XP"</p><p>760,000 hits for "themes for windows 7"</p><p>Is a sign that there is a lot of people out there that like to tweak the GUI to their liking, what is so wrong with giving these people that possibility without having them resort to often very unstable and possibly malware ridden third party applications?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The typical " open source " solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable , with " skins " or " themes " .
This is an admission of failure.1,590,000 hits when Googling " themes for windows vista " 2,450,000 hits for " themes for windows XP " 760,000 hits for " themes for windows 7 " Is a sign that there is a lot of people out there that like to tweak the GUI to their liking , what is so wrong with giving these people that possibility without having them resort to often very unstable and possibly malware ridden third party applications ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The typical "open source" solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable, with "skins" or "themes".
This is an admission of failure.1,590,000 hits when Googling "themes for windows vista"2,450,000 hits for "themes for windows XP"760,000 hits for "themes for windows 7"Is a sign that there is a lot of people out there that like to tweak the GUI to their liking, what is so wrong with giving these people that possibility without having them resort to often very unstable and possibly malware ridden third party applications?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571952</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262020260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I, at least, was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery."</p><p>What are you doing reading<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. then?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I , at least , was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery .
" What are you doing reading / .
then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I, at least, was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.
"What are you doing reading /.
then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569490</id>
	<title>Re:Be careful what you demand Microsoft...</title>
	<author>RMS Eats Toejam</author>
	<datestamp>1261999800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When a Linux desktop distro looks exactly like Windows XP, people already know how to use it.  And with WINE being in a rather mature state, lots of software will run just fine...</p></div><p>Please, people hardly know how to use Windows or any other OS now, but the real problem is the lack of functionality in Linux.  That  being the ability to  run Windows programs flawlessly.  The real fact is that WINE compatibility sucks ass, even after you spend time installing Winetricks and downloading missing fonts and DLL files.  Some programs still don't work at all, don't function property, or crash for no apparent reason.  Even QQ, the chat client widely used in China, does <b>NOT</b> work with Wine.  The only people who believe WINE is so great are the people who only use it for one or two popular programs.  They aren't using it to run every Windows application they use now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When a Linux desktop distro looks exactly like Windows XP , people already know how to use it .
And with WINE being in a rather mature state , lots of software will run just fine...Please , people hardly know how to use Windows or any other OS now , but the real problem is the lack of functionality in Linux .
That being the ability to run Windows programs flawlessly .
The real fact is that WINE compatibility sucks ass , even after you spend time installing Winetricks and downloading missing fonts and DLL files .
Some programs still do n't work at all , do n't function property , or crash for no apparent reason .
Even QQ , the chat client widely used in China , does NOT work with Wine .
The only people who believe WINE is so great are the people who only use it for one or two popular programs .
They are n't using it to run every Windows application they use now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When a Linux desktop distro looks exactly like Windows XP, people already know how to use it.
And with WINE being in a rather mature state, lots of software will run just fine...Please, people hardly know how to use Windows or any other OS now, but the real problem is the lack of functionality in Linux.
That  being the ability to  run Windows programs flawlessly.
The real fact is that WINE compatibility sucks ass, even after you spend time installing Winetricks and downloading missing fonts and DLL files.
Some programs still don't work at all, don't function property, or crash for no apparent reason.
Even QQ, the chat client widely used in China, does NOT work with Wine.
The only people who believe WINE is so great are the people who only use it for one or two popular programs.
They aren't using it to run every Windows application they use now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570242</id>
	<title>Not so hot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262010480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a windows user with little knowledge of Linux I decided what better way to get acquainted than installing a chinese distro? Of course I don't speak any Chinese but it was easy enough to click my way through the install, probably because it's just Ubuntu 9 with different icons etc.  Very exciting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a windows user with little knowledge of Linux I decided what better way to get acquainted than installing a chinese distro ?
Of course I do n't speak any Chinese but it was easy enough to click my way through the install , probably because it 's just Ubuntu 9 with different icons etc .
Very exciting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a windows user with little knowledge of Linux I decided what better way to get acquainted than installing a chinese distro?
Of course I don't speak any Chinese but it was easy enough to click my way through the install, probably because it's just Ubuntu 9 with different icons etc.
Very exciting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568912</id>
	<title>What about Icon and Graphics Copyrights?</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1262031900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone here on Slashdot who knows me knows that I am not a big fan of copyright in general as a concept and certainly not the current US implementation which has been really skewed against the public since the Copyright Act of 1976 and followed with real gems like the Copyright Term Extension Act (a.k.a "The Mickey Mouse Protection Act"). However, having said that; doesn't Microsoft own the copyrights on the Windows XP icon set? It seems to me that they could still quash this in the United States because it appears that the icon files have been ripped verbatim from Windows XP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone here on Slashdot who knows me knows that I am not a big fan of copyright in general as a concept and certainly not the current US implementation which has been really skewed against the public since the Copyright Act of 1976 and followed with real gems like the Copyright Term Extension Act ( a.k.a " The Mickey Mouse Protection Act " ) .
However , having said that ; does n't Microsoft own the copyrights on the Windows XP icon set ?
It seems to me that they could still quash this in the United States because it appears that the icon files have been ripped verbatim from Windows XP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone here on Slashdot who knows me knows that I am not a big fan of copyright in general as a concept and certainly not the current US implementation which has been really skewed against the public since the Copyright Act of 1976 and followed with real gems like the Copyright Term Extension Act (a.k.a "The Mickey Mouse Protection Act").
However, having said that; doesn't Microsoft own the copyrights on the Windows XP icon set?
It seems to me that they could still quash this in the United States because it appears that the icon files have been ripped verbatim from Windows XP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570006</id>
	<title>Re:This is a complete waste of time</title>
	<author>Neuroelectronic</author>
	<datestamp>1262008320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the site:</p><p>&gt;Ylmf OS - the rain forest the wind studio Anniversary Edition, to commemorate the rain forest the first anniversary of the dissolution of the wind studio, we have this special version of the interface, replaced by a fine imitation of the classic Windows theme, the interface operation of clean and clear.</p><p>So in summery, a fine imitation of the classic Windows theme, the interface operation of clean and clear.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the site : &gt; Ylmf OS - the rain forest the wind studio Anniversary Edition , to commemorate the rain forest the first anniversary of the dissolution of the wind studio , we have this special version of the interface , replaced by a fine imitation of the classic Windows theme , the interface operation of clean and clear.So in summery , a fine imitation of the classic Windows theme , the interface operation of clean and clear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the site:&gt;Ylmf OS - the rain forest the wind studio Anniversary Edition, to commemorate the rain forest the first anniversary of the dissolution of the wind studio, we have this special version of the interface, replaced by a fine imitation of the classic Windows theme, the interface operation of clean and clear.So in summery, a fine imitation of the classic Windows theme, the interface operation of clean and clear.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30574384</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates</title>
	<author>jpmorgan</author>
	<datestamp>1262031240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Decades? You mean centuries: <a href="http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=pirate" title="etymonline.com">http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=pirate</a> [etymonline.com] </p><blockquote><div><p>pirate (n.)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Meaning "one who takes another's work without permission" first recorded 1701</p></div></blockquote><p>Guess what... the word means what it does. It's meant that for a very, very long time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Decades ?
You mean centuries : http : //www.etymonline.com/index.php ? term = pirate [ etymonline.com ] pirate ( n. ) ... Meaning " one who takes another 's work without permission " first recorded 1701Guess what... the word means what it does .
It 's meant that for a very , very long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Decades?
You mean centuries: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=pirate [etymonline.com] pirate (n.) ... Meaning "one who takes another's work without permission" first recorded 1701Guess what... the word means what it does.
It's meant that for a very, very long time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568824</id>
	<title>Finally Linux Gets a Decent GUI!!!!</title>
	<author>linguizic</author>
	<datestamp>1261943640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Finally Linux gets a decent GUI!!! [ducks head]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally Linux gets a decent GUI ! ! !
[ ducks head ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally Linux gets a decent GUI!!!
[ducks head]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572972</id>
	<title>From Comment in TFA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262024760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>King S said  10:06PM on 12-27-2009</p><p>The problem is that Linux can't run games. If Linux is such an awesome OS, then why can't someone develop an application that can run ALL windows games. FYI, no one is going to develop games for Linux, and to expect game companies to waste time doing so is b***s***. Until Linux can run games, Linux is still 2nd best...after Windows.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>King S said 10 : 06PM on 12-27-2009The problem is that Linux ca n't run games .
If Linux is such an awesome OS , then why ca n't someone develop an application that can run ALL windows games .
FYI , no one is going to develop games for Linux , and to expect game companies to waste time doing so is b * * * s * * * .
Until Linux can run games , Linux is still 2nd best...after Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>King S said  10:06PM on 12-27-2009The problem is that Linux can't run games.
If Linux is such an awesome OS, then why can't someone develop an application that can run ALL windows games.
FYI, no one is going to develop games for Linux, and to expect game companies to waste time doing so is b***s***.
Until Linux can run games, Linux is still 2nd best...after Windows.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569740</id>
	<title>Re:Make WinXP look like KDE; Make GNOME look like</title>
	<author>srothroc</author>
	<datestamp>1262004300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Make XP look like 98 look like Ubuntu look like 95!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Make XP look like 98 look like Ubuntu look like 95 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make XP look like 98 look like Ubuntu look like 95!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569166</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570402</id>
	<title>Re:Graphics</title>
	<author>Alarindris</author>
	<datestamp>1262011500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's an elaborate ploy by Microsoft to show the masses how evil Linux is?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's an elaborate ploy by Microsoft to show the masses how evil Linux is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's an elaborate ploy by Microsoft to show the masses how evil Linux is?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572252</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1262021820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've written some audio decoder libraries and I'm amazed at how most users just ignore the errors returned, or treat them as pass/fail, even though this is extremely unhelpful to the user. The user wants to solve the problem, but needs to know the difference between "out of memory", "disk full", "insufficient file permissions", "corrupt file", and "unsupported feature". The user can often guess, but if he's wrong, he'll waste time applying useless solutions, and perhaps finally, via trial-and-error, determine the real problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've written some audio decoder libraries and I 'm amazed at how most users just ignore the errors returned , or treat them as pass/fail , even though this is extremely unhelpful to the user .
The user wants to solve the problem , but needs to know the difference between " out of memory " , " disk full " , " insufficient file permissions " , " corrupt file " , and " unsupported feature " .
The user can often guess , but if he 's wrong , he 'll waste time applying useless solutions , and perhaps finally , via trial-and-error , determine the real problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've written some audio decoder libraries and I'm amazed at how most users just ignore the errors returned, or treat them as pass/fail, even though this is extremely unhelpful to the user.
The user wants to solve the problem, but needs to know the difference between "out of memory", "disk full", "insufficient file permissions", "corrupt file", and "unsupported feature".
The user can often guess, but if he's wrong, he'll waste time applying useless solutions, and perhaps finally, via trial-and-error, determine the real problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569606</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262002200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now that "real" pirates are back on the world stage, maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate? I, at least, was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.</p></div><p>Good luck with it. And by the way, overloading multiple meanings into one word depending on context is by far not a new approach in human languages. Better get used to it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that " real " pirates are back on the world stage , maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate ?
I , at least , was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.Good luck with it .
And by the way , overloading multiple meanings into one word depending on context is by far not a new approach in human languages .
Better get used to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that "real" pirates are back on the world stage, maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate?
I, at least, was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.Good luck with it.
And by the way, overloading multiple meanings into one word depending on context is by far not a new approach in human languages.
Better get used to it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568930</id>
	<title>GO2AT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262032140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lubrication. You wasn't on Sjteve's for *BSD because</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lubrication .
You was n't on Sjteve 's for * BSD because</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lubrication.
You wasn't on Sjteve's for *BSD because</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30576092</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>GF678</author>
	<datestamp>1261996860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>My biggest frustration when trying to sort out problems on other people's Windows boxes is the frequency with which one gets an error message which amounts to "Something went wrong, but we're not telling you what." The big mistake which the Windows developers make is hiding information from the user so even if you are capable of understanding the technical aspects of the problem, you're not allowed to see them.</p></div></blockquote><p>Oh that's right, because Linux is so much better in this regard...</p><p><a href="http://i.imgur.com/Y56vJ.png" title="imgur.com">http://i.imgur.com/Y56vJ.png</a> [imgur.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My biggest frustration when trying to sort out problems on other people 's Windows boxes is the frequency with which one gets an error message which amounts to " Something went wrong , but we 're not telling you what .
" The big mistake which the Windows developers make is hiding information from the user so even if you are capable of understanding the technical aspects of the problem , you 're not allowed to see them.Oh that 's right , because Linux is so much better in this regard...http : //i.imgur.com/Y56vJ.png [ imgur.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My biggest frustration when trying to sort out problems on other people's Windows boxes is the frequency with which one gets an error message which amounts to "Something went wrong, but we're not telling you what.
" The big mistake which the Windows developers make is hiding information from the user so even if you are capable of understanding the technical aspects of the problem, you're not allowed to see them.Oh that's right, because Linux is so much better in this regard...http://i.imgur.com/Y56vJ.png [imgur.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572210</id>
	<title>Re:and the blue screen of death?</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1262021640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nahh, cron would be too reliable for that task.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nahh , cron would be too reliable for that task .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nahh, cron would be too reliable for that task.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570060</id>
	<title>Re:Make WinXP look like KDE; Make GNOME look like</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262008860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Enlightenment isn't designed to look like NeXTSTEP (although it might be possible to customize it to do that), which is what litestep (which based on that screenshot only adds a dock to a basic Win95 look) and just about every other *step tries to do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Enlightenment is n't designed to look like NeXTSTEP ( although it might be possible to customize it to do that ) , which is what litestep ( which based on that screenshot only adds a dock to a basic Win95 look ) and just about every other * step tries to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Enlightenment isn't designed to look like NeXTSTEP (although it might be possible to customize it to do that), which is what litestep (which based on that screenshot only adds a dock to a basic Win95 look) and just about every other *step tries to do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569166</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569132</id>
	<title>Be careful what you demand Microsoft...</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1261991940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the longest time while Microsoft was busy solidifying its monopoly position on the desktop, it did nothing short of encouraging copyright infringement by actually reporting "pirated copies" of its OS in its reported figures.</p><p>Once that mission was accomplished and any sort of competition was put behind them, they started using stronger means to protect their software.  But perhaps the measures are too strong in today's "Linux curious" environment.</p><p>When a Linux desktop distro looks exactly like Windows XP, people already know how to use it.  And with WINE being in a rather mature state, lots of software will run just fine... (including malware, I'm afraid...)  It still will not be long before people realize they are not using Windows, but are quite able to use it... they will also realize that they CAN use it and may not need Windows after all.  Perhaps this is something Microsoft doesn't want people to know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the longest time while Microsoft was busy solidifying its monopoly position on the desktop , it did nothing short of encouraging copyright infringement by actually reporting " pirated copies " of its OS in its reported figures.Once that mission was accomplished and any sort of competition was put behind them , they started using stronger means to protect their software .
But perhaps the measures are too strong in today 's " Linux curious " environment.When a Linux desktop distro looks exactly like Windows XP , people already know how to use it .
And with WINE being in a rather mature state , lots of software will run just fine... ( including malware , I 'm afraid... ) It still will not be long before people realize they are not using Windows , but are quite able to use it... they will also realize that they CAN use it and may not need Windows after all .
Perhaps this is something Microsoft does n't want people to know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the longest time while Microsoft was busy solidifying its monopoly position on the desktop, it did nothing short of encouraging copyright infringement by actually reporting "pirated copies" of its OS in its reported figures.Once that mission was accomplished and any sort of competition was put behind them, they started using stronger means to protect their software.
But perhaps the measures are too strong in today's "Linux curious" environment.When a Linux desktop distro looks exactly like Windows XP, people already know how to use it.
And with WINE being in a rather mature state, lots of software will run just fine... (including malware, I'm afraid...)  It still will not be long before people realize they are not using Windows, but are quite able to use it... they will also realize that they CAN use it and may not need Windows after all.
Perhaps this is something Microsoft doesn't want people to know.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569166</id>
	<title>Make WinXP look like KDE; Make GNOME look like  .</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1261992420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Make WinXP look like KDE
<a href="http://www.tech-atom.com/windows/ultimate-linux-transformation-pack-for-windows-xp.html" title="tech-atom.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.tech-atom.com/windows/ultimate-linux-transformation-pack-for-windows-xp.html</a> [tech-atom.com]
</p><p>
Make GNOME look like WinXP
<a href="http://ubuntu.online02.com/xpgnome" title="online02.com" rel="nofollow">http://ubuntu.online02.com/xpgnome</a> [online02.com]
</p><p>
Make WinXP look likeUbuntu
<a href="http://pc-hacks.blogspot.com/2007/10/make-up-over-your-windows-look-like.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://pc-hacks.blogspot.com/2007/10/make-up-over-your-windows-look-like.html</a> [blogspot.com]
</p><p>
Make WinXP look like Enlightenment
<a href="http://www.litestep.net/" title="litestep.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.litestep.net/</a> [litestep.net]
</p><p>
Make Linux look like Win95
<a href="http://fvwm.org/" title="fvwm.org" rel="nofollow">http://fvwm.org/</a> [fvwm.org]
</p><p>
It all makes my head hurt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Make WinXP look like KDE http : //www.tech-atom.com/windows/ultimate-linux-transformation-pack-for-windows-xp.html [ tech-atom.com ] Make GNOME look like WinXP http : //ubuntu.online02.com/xpgnome [ online02.com ] Make WinXP look likeUbuntu http : //pc-hacks.blogspot.com/2007/10/make-up-over-your-windows-look-like.html [ blogspot.com ] Make WinXP look like Enlightenment http : //www.litestep.net/ [ litestep.net ] Make Linux look like Win95 http : //fvwm.org/ [ fvwm.org ] It all makes my head hurt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make WinXP look like KDE
http://www.tech-atom.com/windows/ultimate-linux-transformation-pack-for-windows-xp.html [tech-atom.com]

Make GNOME look like WinXP
http://ubuntu.online02.com/xpgnome [online02.com]

Make WinXP look likeUbuntu
http://pc-hacks.blogspot.com/2007/10/make-up-over-your-windows-look-like.html [blogspot.com]

Make WinXP look like Enlightenment
http://www.litestep.net/ [litestep.net]

Make Linux look like Win95
http://fvwm.org/ [fvwm.org]

It all makes my head hurt.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570450</id>
	<title>doesn't look like XP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262011920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It appears that the screenshot was taken from the real Windows XP, and Ylmf OS does not look much like XP, but rather exactly like Gnome.</p><p>Here's a screenshot taken from someone who installed the ISO in VMWare and changed the locale to English: <a href="http://i50.tinypic.com/2lar9s0.jpg" title="tinypic.com" rel="nofollow">http://i50.tinypic.com/2lar9s0.jpg</a> [tinypic.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It appears that the screenshot was taken from the real Windows XP , and Ylmf OS does not look much like XP , but rather exactly like Gnome.Here 's a screenshot taken from someone who installed the ISO in VMWare and changed the locale to English : http : //i50.tinypic.com/2lar9s0.jpg [ tinypic.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It appears that the screenshot was taken from the real Windows XP, and Ylmf OS does not look much like XP, but rather exactly like Gnome.Here's a screenshot taken from someone who installed the ISO in VMWare and changed the locale to English: http://i50.tinypic.com/2lar9s0.jpg [tinypic.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30578948</id>
	<title>Re:Someone call the woodsman!</title>
	<author>HalAtWork</author>
	<datestamp>1262019480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it's based on Ubuntu, it probably supports all the devices XP does and more.  You can install TrueType fonts in Ubuntu, and I'm sure they include msttcorefonts.  With Wine, it could run most XP applications.  There are more recent versions of desktop software that work better on Ubuntu than XP.  Ubuntu still receives updates.  It's not a bad substitute for Windows XP, I'd say.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it 's based on Ubuntu , it probably supports all the devices XP does and more .
You can install TrueType fonts in Ubuntu , and I 'm sure they include msttcorefonts .
With Wine , it could run most XP applications .
There are more recent versions of desktop software that work better on Ubuntu than XP .
Ubuntu still receives updates .
It 's not a bad substitute for Windows XP , I 'd say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it's based on Ubuntu, it probably supports all the devices XP does and more.
You can install TrueType fonts in Ubuntu, and I'm sure they include msttcorefonts.
With Wine, it could run most XP applications.
There are more recent versions of desktop software that work better on Ubuntu than XP.
Ubuntu still receives updates.
It's not a bad substitute for Windows XP, I'd say.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30579106</id>
	<title>Re:Graphics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262021160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HoKay...</p><p>Yes, they are using copyrighted graphics - which is piracy in the same sense that copying the core software itself would be. One difference would be that re-painted Ubuntnu wouldn't be trying to contact the MS-mothership.</p><p>"What does this accomplish for them, exactly?"</p><p>At this point, it's like the guys who sell the fake Rolex's: they aren't infringing the Rolex manufacturing patents by making exact copies, down to the last screw and jewel (which would be the software piracy they used to do); they are taking cheap watch-works and slapping the Rolex name on them so they can sell them for a high price.</p><p>You would spend more on (what you thought was) a real Rolex than on a perfectly accurate Timex. So by branding the Linux with the XP name and selling it, they are committing the same kind of piracy as people who make counterfeit handbags, watches, clothes, etc.</p><p>That said; people will automatically assume that something that costs more MUST be better than something cheap, and CERTAINLY better than something free, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HoKay...Yes , they are using copyrighted graphics - which is piracy in the same sense that copying the core software itself would be .
One difference would be that re-painted Ubuntnu would n't be trying to contact the MS-mothership .
" What does this accomplish for them , exactly ?
" At this point , it 's like the guys who sell the fake Rolex 's : they are n't infringing the Rolex manufacturing patents by making exact copies , down to the last screw and jewel ( which would be the software piracy they used to do ) ; they are taking cheap watch-works and slapping the Rolex name on them so they can sell them for a high price.You would spend more on ( what you thought was ) a real Rolex than on a perfectly accurate Timex .
So by branding the Linux with the XP name and selling it , they are committing the same kind of piracy as people who make counterfeit handbags , watches , clothes , etc.That said ; people will automatically assume that something that costs more MUST be better than something cheap , and CERTAINLY better than something free , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HoKay...Yes, they are using copyrighted graphics - which is piracy in the same sense that copying the core software itself would be.
One difference would be that re-painted Ubuntnu wouldn't be trying to contact the MS-mothership.
"What does this accomplish for them, exactly?
"At this point, it's like the guys who sell the fake Rolex's: they aren't infringing the Rolex manufacturing patents by making exact copies, down to the last screw and jewel (which would be the software piracy they used to do); they are taking cheap watch-works and slapping the Rolex name on them so they can sell them for a high price.You would spend more on (what you thought was) a real Rolex than on a perfectly accurate Timex.
So by branding the Linux with the XP name and selling it, they are committing the same kind of piracy as people who make counterfeit handbags, watches, clothes, etc.That said; people will automatically assume that something that costs more MUST be better than something cheap, and CERTAINLY better than something free, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569332</id>
	<title>I think...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261996500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once you have reached a certain position in the market your GUI should no longer be allowed to find protection through copyright/patents (don't get me started on patents).</p><p>You have made you money. You've cashed in on your (trivial) ideas. Maybe, in general,  it wouldn't be a bad idea to limit copyright after a certain profit has been made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once you have reached a certain position in the market your GUI should no longer be allowed to find protection through copyright/patents ( do n't get me started on patents ) .You have made you money .
You 've cashed in on your ( trivial ) ideas .
Maybe , in general , it would n't be a bad idea to limit copyright after a certain profit has been made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once you have reached a certain position in the market your GUI should no longer be allowed to find protection through copyright/patents (don't get me started on patents).You have made you money.
You've cashed in on your (trivial) ideas.
Maybe, in general,  it wouldn't be a bad idea to limit copyright after a certain profit has been made.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571240</id>
	<title>Copyrightability</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1262016660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it's virtually certain that they used the copyrighted graphics that come with Windows to make this. Depending on how thorough they are, they may have used a fair amount of copyrighted text, as well.</p></div><p>I don't know about Chinese copyright law, but in the United States, menu text is not copyrightable (<i>Lotus v. Borland</i>); nor are simple geometric shapes such as the minimize, maximize, and close controls. And even though scalable fonts are copyrighted computer programs for generating glyphs, the resulting glyphs aren't copyrightable, even when collected in a bitmap font. But I draw the line at that four-color flag.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's virtually certain that they used the copyrighted graphics that come with Windows to make this .
Depending on how thorough they are , they may have used a fair amount of copyrighted text , as well.I do n't know about Chinese copyright law , but in the United States , menu text is not copyrightable ( Lotus v. Borland ) ; nor are simple geometric shapes such as the minimize , maximize , and close controls .
And even though scalable fonts are copyrighted computer programs for generating glyphs , the resulting glyphs are n't copyrightable , even when collected in a bitmap font .
But I draw the line at that four-color flag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's virtually certain that they used the copyrighted graphics that come with Windows to make this.
Depending on how thorough they are, they may have used a fair amount of copyrighted text, as well.I don't know about Chinese copyright law, but in the United States, menu text is not copyrightable (Lotus v. Borland); nor are simple geometric shapes such as the minimize, maximize, and close controls.
And even though scalable fonts are copyrighted computer programs for generating glyphs, the resulting glyphs aren't copyrightable, even when collected in a bitmap font.
But I draw the line at that four-color flag.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572008</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Junta</author>
	<datestamp>1262020560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The typical "open source" solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable, with "skins" or "themes". This is an admission of failure.</p> </div><p>While a poor default for a general populace is bad, giving the user the control to theme is hardly an admission of failure.  By that measure, the fact that third-party themes/skins are hacked into MS and Apple products mean they fail too.  The fact I can buy different color siding for my house suggests failure in creating my house appearance.  Being able to buy a sports car in multiple colors would represent admitting failure.  Simple fact is that humanity has a varying set of tastes and inclinations, enabling people to tailor something to their needs is not a bad thing.</p><p>I can't speak to Blender specifically, but I have heard it compared to vi vs. gedit/notepad.  If that is the case I can respect Blender for their UI design catering to experts at the expense of an easy learning curve.  Sometimes it's impossible to do both in a single project, so you leave one (possibly more popular) paradigm to competitors while you focus on delivering on your own interface paradigm with its adherents.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream. "exit" should have had "argc" and "argv" parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller.</p> </div><p>This is a total mischaracterization.  I have seen the UIs you describe and it is about laziness rather than failure of the wrapped CLI.  Windows and OSX has these too (not first party, but one particular *commercial* OSX app I can think of just is a wrapper for ffmpeg CLI utility that acts like this).  Don't blame Unix for simplified exit codes (seeing as how any C program falls into that for 'exit', which is not crippling).  Besides, OSX is a Unix too  The problem is that the GUI designer opts not to think about the meaning of output and just dumps it to user.  If they had a theoretical argc/argv structure passed back, they'd just dump that too, with no extra effort. The simple fact is that there are three free-form streams to communicate with an external program (stdin, stdout, stderr) which can encode arbitrary complex structures for CLI wrapping. A good CLI frontend can do a lot with this facility if they so choose, but the typical thing to do for a more 'integrated' experience is to select a backend with functions exported via API rather than wrapping a CLI.  This is the same regardless of platform or project, and as my example points out above, this is *not* any more strange or different in Linux than OSX or Windows.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC.</p></div><p>  I can't speak to the EeePC experience first hand, but I had heard that the platform was full of amateurish hacks relative to other efforts out there.  Linux has no barrier to entry, allowing even the most amateur efforts to potentially get rolled out in a high-profile scenario, which is risky from a 'marketing' perspective to the 'Linux' platform.  This may be a good reason to refer to a platform as 'WebOS', 'Android', 'SuSE', 'RedHat', 'Ubuntu', or whatever first and 'Linux' a relatively distant second when dealing with a less familiar audience.  A Gentoo Box is markedly distinct in end-user experience from a Palm WebOS device, so blanket statements about how Linux overall 'doesn't get it' (or 'does get it') are not possible to feasibly back (except maybe talking about low-level details of exceedingly common components like the kernel/glibc or vague commentary on the philosophy, but that's rarely the subject of discussion).  It's like saying OSX 'doesn't get it' because you tried a random guy's weeked XCode project and it was a simple piece of crap.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The typical " open source " solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable , with " skins " or " themes " .
This is an admission of failure .
While a poor default for a general populace is bad , giving the user the control to theme is hardly an admission of failure .
By that measure , the fact that third-party themes/skins are hacked into MS and Apple products mean they fail too .
The fact I can buy different color siding for my house suggests failure in creating my house appearance .
Being able to buy a sports car in multiple colors would represent admitting failure .
Simple fact is that humanity has a varying set of tastes and inclinations , enabling people to tailor something to their needs is not a bad thing.I ca n't speak to Blender specifically , but I have heard it compared to vi vs. gedit/notepad. If that is the case I can respect Blender for their UI design catering to experts at the expense of an easy learning curve .
Sometimes it 's impossible to do both in a single project , so you leave one ( possibly more popular ) paradigm to competitors while you focus on delivering on your own interface paradigm with its adherents.This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess , you can pass in a list of arguments , but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream .
" exit " should have had " argc " and " argv " parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller .
This is a total mischaracterization .
I have seen the UIs you describe and it is about laziness rather than failure of the wrapped CLI .
Windows and OSX has these too ( not first party , but one particular * commercial * OSX app I can think of just is a wrapper for ffmpeg CLI utility that acts like this ) .
Do n't blame Unix for simplified exit codes ( seeing as how any C program falls into that for 'exit ' , which is not crippling ) .
Besides , OSX is a Unix too The problem is that the GUI designer opts not to think about the meaning of output and just dumps it to user .
If they had a theoretical argc/argv structure passed back , they 'd just dump that too , with no extra effort .
The simple fact is that there are three free-form streams to communicate with an external program ( stdin , stdout , stderr ) which can encode arbitrary complex structures for CLI wrapping .
A good CLI frontend can do a lot with this facility if they so choose , but the typical thing to do for a more 'integrated ' experience is to select a backend with functions exported via API rather than wrapping a CLI .
This is the same regardless of platform or project , and as my example points out above , this is * not * any more strange or different in Linux than OSX or Windows.For a painful example of this problem , make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC .
I ca n't speak to the EeePC experience first hand , but I had heard that the platform was full of amateurish hacks relative to other efforts out there .
Linux has no barrier to entry , allowing even the most amateur efforts to potentially get rolled out in a high-profile scenario , which is risky from a 'marketing ' perspective to the 'Linux ' platform .
This may be a good reason to refer to a platform as 'WebOS ' , 'Android ' , 'SuSE ' , 'RedHat ' , 'Ubuntu ' , or whatever first and 'Linux ' a relatively distant second when dealing with a less familiar audience .
A Gentoo Box is markedly distinct in end-user experience from a Palm WebOS device , so blanket statements about how Linux overall 'does n't get it ' ( or 'does get it ' ) are not possible to feasibly back ( except maybe talking about low-level details of exceedingly common components like the kernel/glibc or vague commentary on the philosophy , but that 's rarely the subject of discussion ) .
It 's like saying OSX 'does n't get it ' because you tried a random guy 's weeked XCode project and it was a simple piece of crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The typical "open source" solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable, with "skins" or "themes".
This is an admission of failure.
While a poor default for a general populace is bad, giving the user the control to theme is hardly an admission of failure.
By that measure, the fact that third-party themes/skins are hacked into MS and Apple products mean they fail too.
The fact I can buy different color siding for my house suggests failure in creating my house appearance.
Being able to buy a sports car in multiple colors would represent admitting failure.
Simple fact is that humanity has a varying set of tastes and inclinations, enabling people to tailor something to their needs is not a bad thing.I can't speak to Blender specifically, but I have heard it compared to vi vs. gedit/notepad.  If that is the case I can respect Blender for their UI design catering to experts at the expense of an easy learning curve.
Sometimes it's impossible to do both in a single project, so you leave one (possibly more popular) paradigm to competitors while you focus on delivering on your own interface paradigm with its adherents.This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream.
"exit" should have had "argc" and "argv" parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller.
This is a total mischaracterization.
I have seen the UIs you describe and it is about laziness rather than failure of the wrapped CLI.
Windows and OSX has these too (not first party, but one particular *commercial* OSX app I can think of just is a wrapper for ffmpeg CLI utility that acts like this).
Don't blame Unix for simplified exit codes (seeing as how any C program falls into that for 'exit', which is not crippling).
Besides, OSX is a Unix too  The problem is that the GUI designer opts not to think about the meaning of output and just dumps it to user.
If they had a theoretical argc/argv structure passed back, they'd just dump that too, with no extra effort.
The simple fact is that there are three free-form streams to communicate with an external program (stdin, stdout, stderr) which can encode arbitrary complex structures for CLI wrapping.
A good CLI frontend can do a lot with this facility if they so choose, but the typical thing to do for a more 'integrated' experience is to select a backend with functions exported via API rather than wrapping a CLI.
This is the same regardless of platform or project, and as my example points out above, this is *not* any more strange or different in Linux than OSX or Windows.For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC.
I can't speak to the EeePC experience first hand, but I had heard that the platform was full of amateurish hacks relative to other efforts out there.
Linux has no barrier to entry, allowing even the most amateur efforts to potentially get rolled out in a high-profile scenario, which is risky from a 'marketing' perspective to the 'Linux' platform.
This may be a good reason to refer to a platform as 'WebOS', 'Android', 'SuSE', 'RedHat', 'Ubuntu', or whatever first and 'Linux' a relatively distant second when dealing with a less familiar audience.
A Gentoo Box is markedly distinct in end-user experience from a Palm WebOS device, so blanket statements about how Linux overall 'doesn't get it' (or 'does get it') are not possible to feasibly back (except maybe talking about low-level details of exceedingly common components like the kernel/glibc or vague commentary on the philosophy, but that's rarely the subject of discussion).
It's like saying OSX 'doesn't get it' because you tried a random guy's weeked XCode project and it was a simple piece of crap.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569572</id>
	<title>*boggle*</title>
	<author>ubrgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1262001420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How does something look, "just like Windows XP" in one sentence and, "Really, really similar" in the next?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does something look , " just like Windows XP " in one sentence and , " Really , really similar " in the next ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does something look, "just like Windows XP" in one sentence and, "Really, really similar" in the next?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571230</id>
	<title>Copyright what?</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1262016600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The word "start"?
</p><p>Or copyright the idea of a wastepaper basket to hold deleted files until you are really ready to delete them? I don't think MS wants to claim that, Apple would want to collect a few billion from a previous case were MS argued AGAINST your idea.
</p><p>This gui is nothing new, there are lots of skins available for various linux desktops including every well known interface out there. So far nobody has taken this to court and I think because nobody wants to say to a judge "Copying an element from a gui is bad" because that is what everyone does.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The word " start " ?
Or copyright the idea of a wastepaper basket to hold deleted files until you are really ready to delete them ?
I do n't think MS wants to claim that , Apple would want to collect a few billion from a previous case were MS argued AGAINST your idea .
This gui is nothing new , there are lots of skins available for various linux desktops including every well known interface out there .
So far nobody has taken this to court and I think because nobody wants to say to a judge " Copying an element from a gui is bad " because that is what everyone does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The word "start"?
Or copyright the idea of a wastepaper basket to hold deleted files until you are really ready to delete them?
I don't think MS wants to claim that, Apple would want to collect a few billion from a previous case were MS argued AGAINST your idea.
This gui is nothing new, there are lots of skins available for various linux desktops including every well known interface out there.
So far nobody has taken this to court and I think because nobody wants to say to a judge "Copying an element from a gui is bad" because that is what everyone does.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569436</id>
	<title>This is GREAT...</title>
	<author>tyroneking</author>
	<datestamp>1261998480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.... just what I need to fool my clients into using Ubuntu instead of crappy Microsoft XP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.... just what I need to fool my clients into using Ubuntu instead of crappy Microsoft XP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.... just what I need to fool my clients into using Ubuntu instead of crappy Microsoft XP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569666</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates</title>
	<author>FrostedWheat</author>
	<datestamp>1262003220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What should we replace it with? "I ninja'ed the latest copy of Photoshop" just doesn't sound right.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What should we replace it with ?
" I ninja'ed the latest copy of Photoshop " just does n't sound right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What should we replace it with?
"I ninja'ed the latest copy of Photoshop" just doesn't sound right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569102</id>
	<title>FVWM was good enough in my day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261991520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FVWM was a good enough Windows knockoff for us in my day and it should be good enough now. But no, you kids gotta have your fancy XP icons and wallpaper. </p><p>Now get off my lawn!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FVWM was a good enough Windows knockoff for us in my day and it should be good enough now .
But no , you kids got ta have your fancy XP icons and wallpaper .
Now get off my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FVWM was a good enough Windows knockoff for us in my day and it should be good enough now.
But no, you kids gotta have your fancy XP icons and wallpaper.
Now get off my lawn!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571188</id>
	<title>Doesn't Ubuntu already look like Windows?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262016360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apart from the skin/theme...</p><p>I mean, it&rsquo;s got:<br>- A task bar, exactly like Windows<br>- A start menu, exactly like Windows<br>- A area with icons, right next to the clock, exactly like Windows<br>- Windows with a icon, a title, a minimize, a maximize and close button, exactly like Windows<br>- A trash can and a &ldquo;my computer icon, exactly like Windows<br>- The same shortcuts as Windows<br>- The same hardware-detection mechanisms (e.g. a stupid windows popping up when you insert a CD)<br>- All Windows window manager mechanisms (drag, resize,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...)<br>- File open and save dialogs with the same functionality<br>- A file manager that tries to imitate Windows Explorer, even with the giant icons and new windows opening when you click on one, and the fake structure with &ldquo;my computer&rdquo; on top, instead of &ldquo;/&rdquo; or $HOME.<br>- Desktop search.<br>- Etc, etc, etc.</p><p>Add a theme, and it&rsquo;s Windows.</p><p>P.S.: Hey fanboys: I <em>love</em> Linux. But I <em>hate</em> how the desktop environments threw all its philosophies out of the window, in favor of the crappy Windows concepts. Just to get the pat on the back from some stupid Windows retards who can&rsquo;t even grasp something new and innovative, when it hits them right in the head. Stop running behind the acceptance of others! Because that won&rsquo;t ever get you accepted. Do your own thing! <em>Then</em> you get what you want. Because that&rsquo;s what it means to lead: To <em>lead</em> the way! This is serious critique. On all Linux desktop environments, and most window managers. For imitating instead of innovating.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apart from the skin/theme...I mean , it    s got : - A task bar , exactly like Windows- A start menu , exactly like Windows- A area with icons , right next to the clock , exactly like Windows- Windows with a icon , a title , a minimize , a maximize and close button , exactly like Windows- A trash can and a    my computer icon , exactly like Windows- The same shortcuts as Windows- The same hardware-detection mechanisms ( e.g .
a stupid windows popping up when you insert a CD ) - All Windows window manager mechanisms ( drag , resize , ... ) - File open and save dialogs with the same functionality- A file manager that tries to imitate Windows Explorer , even with the giant icons and new windows opening when you click on one , and the fake structure with    my computer    on top , instead of    /    or $ HOME.- Desktop search.- Etc , etc , etc.Add a theme , and it    s Windows.P.S .
: Hey fanboys : I love Linux .
But I hate how the desktop environments threw all its philosophies out of the window , in favor of the crappy Windows concepts .
Just to get the pat on the back from some stupid Windows retards who can    t even grasp something new and innovative , when it hits them right in the head .
Stop running behind the acceptance of others !
Because that won    t ever get you accepted .
Do your own thing !
Then you get what you want .
Because that    s what it means to lead : To lead the way !
This is serious critique .
On all Linux desktop environments , and most window managers .
For imitating instead of innovating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apart from the skin/theme...I mean, it’s got:- A task bar, exactly like Windows- A start menu, exactly like Windows- A area with icons, right next to the clock, exactly like Windows- Windows with a icon, a title, a minimize, a maximize and close button, exactly like Windows- A trash can and a “my computer icon, exactly like Windows- The same shortcuts as Windows- The same hardware-detection mechanisms (e.g.
a stupid windows popping up when you insert a CD)- All Windows window manager mechanisms (drag, resize, ...)- File open and save dialogs with the same functionality- A file manager that tries to imitate Windows Explorer, even with the giant icons and new windows opening when you click on one, and the fake structure with “my computer” on top, instead of “/” or $HOME.- Desktop search.- Etc, etc, etc.Add a theme, and it’s Windows.P.S.
: Hey fanboys: I love Linux.
But I hate how the desktop environments threw all its philosophies out of the window, in favor of the crappy Windows concepts.
Just to get the pat on the back from some stupid Windows retards who can’t even grasp something new and innovative, when it hits them right in the head.
Stop running behind the acceptance of others!
Because that won’t ever get you accepted.
Do your own thing!
Then you get what you want.
Because that’s what it means to lead: To lead the way!
This is serious critique.
On all Linux desktop environments, and most window managers.
For imitating instead of innovating.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569198</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261992840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Blender's GUI is great, it has a learning curve because it's a complicated program, like most 3D applications and takes a while to get used to. But there is absolutely nothing terribly wrong with its GUI, in fact it is faster and more efficient than the Max or XSI's.<br><br>Why? Because artists made it, and they know how they want to use their own program for their own work more than you do.<br><br>Blender is getting customisation support only to make it more accessible to people that are too stupid or too lazy or don't have enough time to go from their favourite application to Blender, it's also a bit of a side effect of the updated core which is now a lot more organised.<br><br>Label this under obligatory Blender defending.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Blender 's GUI is great , it has a learning curve because it 's a complicated program , like most 3D applications and takes a while to get used to .
But there is absolutely nothing terribly wrong with its GUI , in fact it is faster and more efficient than the Max or XSI 's.Why ?
Because artists made it , and they know how they want to use their own program for their own work more than you do.Blender is getting customisation support only to make it more accessible to people that are too stupid or too lazy or do n't have enough time to go from their favourite application to Blender , it 's also a bit of a side effect of the updated core which is now a lot more organised.Label this under obligatory Blender defending .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blender's GUI is great, it has a learning curve because it's a complicated program, like most 3D applications and takes a while to get used to.
But there is absolutely nothing terribly wrong with its GUI, in fact it is faster and more efficient than the Max or XSI's.Why?
Because artists made it, and they know how they want to use their own program for their own work more than you do.Blender is getting customisation support only to make it more accessible to people that are too stupid or too lazy or don't have enough time to go from their favourite application to Blender, it's also a bit of a side effect of the updated core which is now a lot more organised.Label this under obligatory Blender defending.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569656</id>
	<title>Other uses...</title>
	<author>heidaro</author>
	<datestamp>1262003100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Finally, a good way of getting back at all those relatives who keep asking me to fix their PC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , a good way of getting back at all those relatives who keep asking me to fix their PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, a good way of getting back at all those relatives who keep asking me to fix their PC.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570414</id>
	<title>Re:Someone call the woodsman!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262011620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>User: What a pretty GUI you have.<br>YImf: All the better to confuse you with, my dear.<br>U: And what strange fonts you have.<br>Y: All the better to break your layouts with, my dear.<br>U: And what a lack of app support you have.<br>Y: All the better to irritate you with, my dear.<br>U: And what terrible hardware support you have.<br>Y: All the better to eat up your time with, my dear!</p><p>Just then the hunter entered the house and cut the YImf right down the belly.</p></div></blockquote><p>-1 point for not using a Gru in place of the hunter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>User : What a pretty GUI you have.YImf : All the better to confuse you with , my dear.U : And what strange fonts you have.Y : All the better to break your layouts with , my dear.U : And what a lack of app support you have.Y : All the better to irritate you with , my dear.U : And what terrible hardware support you have.Y : All the better to eat up your time with , my dear ! Just then the hunter entered the house and cut the YImf right down the belly.-1 point for not using a Gru in place of the hunter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>User: What a pretty GUI you have.YImf: All the better to confuse you with, my dear.U: And what strange fonts you have.Y: All the better to break your layouts with, my dear.U: And what a lack of app support you have.Y: All the better to irritate you with, my dear.U: And what terrible hardware support you have.Y: All the better to eat up your time with, my dear!Just then the hunter entered the house and cut the YImf right down the belly.-1 point for not using a Gru in place of the hunter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569954</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>Lehk228</author>
	<datestamp>1262007600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the output text window is not a substitute for the GUI and does not try to be, it displays the information that windows would be hiding somewhere in the event log.  after dealing with a windows laptop with a horked up network driver, trust me i would rather have that information in front of me than have to go digging for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>the output text window is not a substitute for the GUI and does not try to be , it displays the information that windows would be hiding somewhere in the event log .
after dealing with a windows laptop with a horked up network driver , trust me i would rather have that information in front of me than have to go digging for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the output text window is not a substitute for the GUI and does not try to be, it displays the information that windows would be hiding somewhere in the event log.
after dealing with a windows laptop with a horked up network driver, trust me i would rather have that information in front of me than have to go digging for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570782</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262014260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Should I also turn in my Pirate Party card?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should I also turn in my Pirate Party card ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Should I also turn in my Pirate Party card?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568818</id>
	<title>just a damn minute</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261943520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>didn't Microsoft spend a whole decade defending themselves against Apple for engaging in exactly the same sort of conduct in displayed in TFA?  If they sued Ylmf's developer over this, the irony would generate enough magnetism to launch another SGR 1806-20.</htmltext>
<tokenext>did n't Microsoft spend a whole decade defending themselves against Apple for engaging in exactly the same sort of conduct in displayed in TFA ?
If they sued Ylmf 's developer over this , the irony would generate enough magnetism to launch another SGR 1806-20 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>didn't Microsoft spend a whole decade defending themselves against Apple for engaging in exactly the same sort of conduct in displayed in TFA?
If they sued Ylmf's developer over this, the irony would generate enough magnetism to launch another SGR 1806-20.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569542</id>
	<title>Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ</title>
	<author>johnw</author>
	<datestamp>1262000880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Linux community does not get this at all, and the Windows community sometimes forgets it.</p></div><p>On this front, the Linux experience is worlds better than the Windows one.  My biggest frustration when trying to sort out problems on other people's Windows boxes is the frequency with which one gets an error message which amounts to "Something went wrong, but we're not telling you what."  The big mistake which the Windows developers make is hiding information from the user so even if you are capable of understanding the technical aspects of the problem, you're not allowed to see them.</p><p>It's true that the average user either ignores technical information in an error message, or goes into a panic when it appears, but there should always be *some* way of getting at it.  Windows is dreadful in this respect.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Linux community does not get this at all , and the Windows community sometimes forgets it.On this front , the Linux experience is worlds better than the Windows one .
My biggest frustration when trying to sort out problems on other people 's Windows boxes is the frequency with which one gets an error message which amounts to " Something went wrong , but we 're not telling you what .
" The big mistake which the Windows developers make is hiding information from the user so even if you are capable of understanding the technical aspects of the problem , you 're not allowed to see them.It 's true that the average user either ignores technical information in an error message , or goes into a panic when it appears , but there should always be * some * way of getting at it .
Windows is dreadful in this respect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Linux community does not get this at all, and the Windows community sometimes forgets it.On this front, the Linux experience is worlds better than the Windows one.
My biggest frustration when trying to sort out problems on other people's Windows boxes is the frequency with which one gets an error message which amounts to "Something went wrong, but we're not telling you what.
"  The big mistake which the Windows developers make is hiding information from the user so even if you are capable of understanding the technical aspects of the problem, you're not allowed to see them.It's true that the average user either ignores technical information in an error message, or goes into a panic when it appears, but there should always be *some* way of getting at it.
Windows is dreadful in this respect.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571322</id>
	<title>Re:Be careful what you demand Microsoft...</title>
	<author>Duncan J Murray</author>
	<datestamp>1262017080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an amusing story about Microsoft which I came across while travelling around India two years ago.  One of the leprosy colonies we were visiting was paired with an orphanage school, with a few hundred children.  They showed me their IT room - the head of IT proudly showed me a room with around 30 computers in.  They looked a bit old, particularly in a time when LCD screen technology was what I was used to.  Clearly, this was the future for the children of India.  The IT guy explained to me how he'd had 30 copies or so of pirated Windows XP on the computers.  An  Indian rep of Microsoft discovered this and demanded the license fees for the software.  As a charity, with a yearly budget probably less than the cost of these licenses, the IT guy had no choice.  Overnight he switched all the systems to Linux.  The school functioned perfectly well for months, until the Microsoft rep returned to find out what he'd done.  Presumably, suddenly fearful that the emerging IT market in India were being brought up on Linux, he asked him to switch back to Windows and gave him the Windows licenses.</p><p>The sad thing is that it looked like the computers were running Windows when I was there - maybe some were Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an amusing story about Microsoft which I came across while travelling around India two years ago .
One of the leprosy colonies we were visiting was paired with an orphanage school , with a few hundred children .
They showed me their IT room - the head of IT proudly showed me a room with around 30 computers in .
They looked a bit old , particularly in a time when LCD screen technology was what I was used to .
Clearly , this was the future for the children of India .
The IT guy explained to me how he 'd had 30 copies or so of pirated Windows XP on the computers .
An Indian rep of Microsoft discovered this and demanded the license fees for the software .
As a charity , with a yearly budget probably less than the cost of these licenses , the IT guy had no choice .
Overnight he switched all the systems to Linux .
The school functioned perfectly well for months , until the Microsoft rep returned to find out what he 'd done .
Presumably , suddenly fearful that the emerging IT market in India were being brought up on Linux , he asked him to switch back to Windows and gave him the Windows licenses.The sad thing is that it looked like the computers were running Windows when I was there - maybe some were Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an amusing story about Microsoft which I came across while travelling around India two years ago.
One of the leprosy colonies we were visiting was paired with an orphanage school, with a few hundred children.
They showed me their IT room - the head of IT proudly showed me a room with around 30 computers in.
They looked a bit old, particularly in a time when LCD screen technology was what I was used to.
Clearly, this was the future for the children of India.
The IT guy explained to me how he'd had 30 copies or so of pirated Windows XP on the computers.
An  Indian rep of Microsoft discovered this and demanded the license fees for the software.
As a charity, with a yearly budget probably less than the cost of these licenses, the IT guy had no choice.
Overnight he switched all the systems to Linux.
The school functioned perfectly well for months, until the Microsoft rep returned to find out what he'd done.
Presumably, suddenly fearful that the emerging IT market in India were being brought up on Linux, he asked him to switch back to Windows and gave him the Windows licenses.The sad thing is that it looked like the computers were running Windows when I was there - maybe some were Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569132</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30576840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30577566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30577872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30579106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570544
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30576092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30577810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30576950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30574384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30580304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30579624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30573564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569998
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30578948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_0213213_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568908
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569436
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569066
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569234
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30579106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569490
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30579624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569386
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30580304
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30577872
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30576950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569370
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572252
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569542
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30576092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569204
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30573564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30576840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569198
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570552
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568980
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570306
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568818
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30571952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30577810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30574384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569378
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569666
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30577566
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572082
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569936
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568826
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569166
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569740
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30572290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30578948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570414
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569102
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30570006
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568852
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568824
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30569106
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568718
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_0213213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_0213213.30568912
</commentlist>
</conversation>
