<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_29_1938231</id>
	<title>A Mixed Review For Google Chrome On Linux</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1262076840000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>omlx contributes this link to LinuxCrunch's short <a href="http://linuxcrunch.com/content/my-experience-google-chrome">review of Google Chrome on Linux</a>, writing: <i>"The summary of it is that although Google Chrome is in a beta stage, it is fast, stable, and has a simple, clean, and effective GUI design. On other side, Google Chrome has a small number of extensions, doesn't support RSS, lacks integration with KDE, and doesn't support complex scripts very well. Personally, I didn't succeed in using Flash Player on Google Chrome beta 1 (I am using OpenSUSE 11.2) and  I wonder how  the quality of Google Chrome OS will be, especially if it's  based on Linux and Google Chrome."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>omlx contributes this link to LinuxCrunch 's short review of Google Chrome on Linux , writing : " The summary of it is that although Google Chrome is in a beta stage , it is fast , stable , and has a simple , clean , and effective GUI design .
On other side , Google Chrome has a small number of extensions , does n't support RSS , lacks integration with KDE , and does n't support complex scripts very well .
Personally , I did n't succeed in using Flash Player on Google Chrome beta 1 ( I am using OpenSUSE 11.2 ) and I wonder how the quality of Google Chrome OS will be , especially if it 's based on Linux and Google Chrome .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>omlx contributes this link to LinuxCrunch's short review of Google Chrome on Linux, writing: "The summary of it is that although Google Chrome is in a beta stage, it is fast, stable, and has a simple, clean, and effective GUI design.
On other side, Google Chrome has a small number of extensions, doesn't support RSS, lacks integration with KDE, and doesn't support complex scripts very well.
Personally, I didn't succeed in using Flash Player on Google Chrome beta 1 (I am using OpenSUSE 11.2) and  I wonder how  the quality of Google Chrome OS will be, especially if it's  based on Linux and Google Chrome.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587568</id>
	<title>Re:Fix how it handles tabs</title>
	<author>SlashBugs</author>
	<datestamp>1262085540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use saved tabs as a sort of transient, rolling favourites folder for sites that I'll need next session but probably not after that. For example:<br> <br>

1) Today I installed OpenSuse for the first time. I've had lots of tabs open on wikis, FAQs and HowTos while sorting out various issues (Take pity, I'm a n00b). Every time I reboot or log out then log back in, all of those tabs re-open and scroll down to where I was last reading them. Very handy.<br> <br>

2) In work I need to read a lot of scientific papers. My normal pattern is to run a few searches and open up all the likely-looking articles in new tabs, then screen them for the articles that I actually have access to. Finally, when I have the relevent articles for the points I want to write about (10-30 tabs), I start reading them one by one. When I get to the end of the day I need to shutdown the computer but don't want to lose all my latest searching/screening results. I could store them as favourites but I'll probably never need 99\% of them again; saving the session is ideal as it'll remember all the tabs, what order they were in, where I'd scrolled to and which one I had open. It's perfect for the way I work, analogous to leaving my textbooks, printouts and notes open on my desk for the next morning.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use saved tabs as a sort of transient , rolling favourites folder for sites that I 'll need next session but probably not after that .
For example : 1 ) Today I installed OpenSuse for the first time .
I 've had lots of tabs open on wikis , FAQs and HowTos while sorting out various issues ( Take pity , I 'm a n00b ) .
Every time I reboot or log out then log back in , all of those tabs re-open and scroll down to where I was last reading them .
Very handy .
2 ) In work I need to read a lot of scientific papers .
My normal pattern is to run a few searches and open up all the likely-looking articles in new tabs , then screen them for the articles that I actually have access to .
Finally , when I have the relevent articles for the points I want to write about ( 10-30 tabs ) , I start reading them one by one .
When I get to the end of the day I need to shutdown the computer but do n't want to lose all my latest searching/screening results .
I could store them as favourites but I 'll probably never need 99 \ % of them again ; saving the session is ideal as it 'll remember all the tabs , what order they were in , where I 'd scrolled to and which one I had open .
It 's perfect for the way I work , analogous to leaving my textbooks , printouts and notes open on my desk for the next morning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use saved tabs as a sort of transient, rolling favourites folder for sites that I'll need next session but probably not after that.
For example: 

1) Today I installed OpenSuse for the first time.
I've had lots of tabs open on wikis, FAQs and HowTos while sorting out various issues (Take pity, I'm a n00b).
Every time I reboot or log out then log back in, all of those tabs re-open and scroll down to where I was last reading them.
Very handy.
2) In work I need to read a lot of scientific papers.
My normal pattern is to run a few searches and open up all the likely-looking articles in new tabs, then screen them for the articles that I actually have access to.
Finally, when I have the relevent articles for the points I want to write about (10-30 tabs), I start reading them one by one.
When I get to the end of the day I need to shutdown the computer but don't want to lose all my latest searching/screening results.
I could store them as favourites but I'll probably never need 99\% of them again; saving the session is ideal as it'll remember all the tabs, what order they were in, where I'd scrolled to and which one I had open.
It's perfect for the way I work, analogous to leaving my textbooks, printouts and notes open on my desk for the next morning.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30592374</id>
	<title>No on-the-fly Javascript disabled/enable</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259849280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is one that annoys me the most: In Firefox you have the ability to do this from within the browser.<br>In Chrome one has to close and reopen the browser (with --javascript-disabled) every time JS enabling/disabling is needed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one that annoys me the most : In Firefox you have the ability to do this from within the browser.In Chrome one has to close and reopen the browser ( with --javascript-disabled ) every time JS enabling/disabling is needed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one that annoys me the most: In Firefox you have the ability to do this from within the browser.In Chrome one has to close and reopen the browser (with --javascript-disabled) every time JS enabling/disabling is needed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589334</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262095440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don&rsquo;t know how many times I have recommended this simple and effective solution to the XUL problem:</p><p>Just <em>compile</em> the damn stuff into something faster! Like a library, but a bit safer (sandboxed).<br>Leave the XUL files where they are, monitor them with inotify or at specific events, and re-compile them if they were changed (e.g. by installing a extension. Do not accept pre-compiled stuff in an extension. That way you still get to see all the source.</p><p>There, done. I don&rsquo;t get what&rsquo;s so hard about this. The whole parsing and error handling thing is already done. Just walk the tree with functions that replace the nodes with binary code or something alike. And get the dragon book if you haven&rsquo;t already.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div><p>Let us know when your patch to do this gets into a release.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I don    t know how many times I have recommended this simple and effective solution to the XUL problem : Just compile the damn stuff into something faster !
Like a library , but a bit safer ( sandboxed ) .Leave the XUL files where they are , monitor them with inotify or at specific events , and re-compile them if they were changed ( e.g .
by installing a extension .
Do not accept pre-compiled stuff in an extension .
That way you still get to see all the source.There , done .
I don    t get what    s so hard about this .
The whole parsing and error handling thing is already done .
Just walk the tree with functions that replace the nodes with binary code or something alike .
And get the dragon book if you haven    t already .
: ) Let us know when your patch to do this gets into a release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don’t know how many times I have recommended this simple and effective solution to the XUL problem:Just compile the damn stuff into something faster!
Like a library, but a bit safer (sandboxed).Leave the XUL files where they are, monitor them with inotify or at specific events, and re-compile them if they were changed (e.g.
by installing a extension.
Do not accept pre-compiled stuff in an extension.
That way you still get to see all the source.There, done.
I don’t get what’s so hard about this.
The whole parsing and error handling thing is already done.
Just walk the tree with functions that replace the nodes with binary code or something alike.
And get the dragon book if you haven’t already.
:)Let us know when your patch to do this gets into a release.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586812</id>
	<title>Firs)t</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262082540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">every chance I got bottoms butt. Wipe 4, which by all and building is yNEED YOUR HELP! obvious that there for it. I don't new faces and many</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>every chance I got bottoms butt .
Wipe 4 , which by all and building is yNEED YOUR HELP !
obvious that there for it .
I do n't new faces and many [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>every chance I got bottoms butt.
Wipe 4, which by all and building is yNEED YOUR HELP!
obvious that there for it.
I don't new faces and many [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586452</id>
	<title>I would have tried it</title>
	<author>iamacat</author>
	<datestamp>1262080740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But it only comes in an rpm with redhat-specific dependencies, so it doesn't work on my somewhat less common distribution. Why can't they just provide a mostly-static binary like Opera does?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But it only comes in an rpm with redhat-specific dependencies , so it does n't work on my somewhat less common distribution .
Why ca n't they just provide a mostly-static binary like Opera does ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But it only comes in an rpm with redhat-specific dependencies, so it doesn't work on my somewhat less common distribution.
Why can't they just provide a mostly-static binary like Opera does?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586536</id>
	<title>A Mixed Review For Google Chrome On Linux</title>
	<author>omar.sahal</author>
	<datestamp>1262081160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like it. I seem to be using it mostly know, even though firefox is installed on my system. There is one thing however, bookmarks, when I wanted to bookmark a page the UI was so simple (no file edit menus) that I did not know how to do it. Familiarity is one important tenant of user interface design.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like it .
I seem to be using it mostly know , even though firefox is installed on my system .
There is one thing however , bookmarks , when I wanted to bookmark a page the UI was so simple ( no file edit menus ) that I did not know how to do it .
Familiarity is one important tenant of user interface design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like it.
I seem to be using it mostly know, even though firefox is installed on my system.
There is one thing however, bookmarks, when I wanted to bookmark a page the UI was so simple (no file edit menus) that I did not know how to do it.
Familiarity is one important tenant of user interface design.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586466</id>
	<title>Flash works fine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262080800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm running ubuntu using a weak desktop-- flash works perfectly, and the browser is 10x faster than any others I've tried.  I was previously using ephiphany, but chrome makes ephiphany look like firefox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm running ubuntu using a weak desktop-- flash works perfectly , and the browser is 10x faster than any others I 've tried .
I was previously using ephiphany , but chrome makes ephiphany look like firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm running ubuntu using a weak desktop-- flash works perfectly, and the browser is 10x faster than any others I've tried.
I was previously using ephiphany, but chrome makes ephiphany look like firefox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587408</id>
	<title>It's faster</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262085000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On my older IBM Linux system I use as a server, Firefox is sluggish, and Chrome is plain 'ol fast. My only gripe is that the fonts are offset a bit too low, since I strayed from Ubuntu's default font settings. But with the speed being actually usable(no keyboard delays, etc), I'm more than happy with this over firefox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On my older IBM Linux system I use as a server , Firefox is sluggish , and Chrome is plain 'ol fast .
My only gripe is that the fonts are offset a bit too low , since I strayed from Ubuntu 's default font settings .
But with the speed being actually usable ( no keyboard delays , etc ) , I 'm more than happy with this over firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On my older IBM Linux system I use as a server, Firefox is sluggish, and Chrome is plain 'ol fast.
My only gripe is that the fonts are offset a bit too low, since I strayed from Ubuntu's default font settings.
But with the speed being actually usable(no keyboard delays, etc), I'm more than happy with this over firefox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586880</id>
	<title>Distribute glibc then ...</title>
	<author>Bananenrepublik</author>
	<datestamp>1262082960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're having problems with different versions of glibc on different target system then nothing's preventing you from distributing your application together with your favorite glibc.  It's not like disk space would be any concern with any reasonably large application.  You could also cut down glibc to whatever you need.  And BTW this is an advantage of Free software as you are automatically entitled to redistributing the library yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're having problems with different versions of glibc on different target system then nothing 's preventing you from distributing your application together with your favorite glibc .
It 's not like disk space would be any concern with any reasonably large application .
You could also cut down glibc to whatever you need .
And BTW this is an advantage of Free software as you are automatically entitled to redistributing the library yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're having problems with different versions of glibc on different target system then nothing's preventing you from distributing your application together with your favorite glibc.
It's not like disk space would be any concern with any reasonably large application.
You could also cut down glibc to whatever you need.
And BTW this is an advantage of Free software as you are automatically entitled to redistributing the library yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587642</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262085840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4067911/Aho\_-\_Compilers\_-\_Principles\_\_Techniques\_\_and\_Tools\_2e.pdf<br>Please seed!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //thepiratebay.org/torrent/4067911/Aho \ _- \ _Compilers \ _- \ _Principles \ _ \ _Techniques \ _ \ _and \ _Tools \ _2e.pdfPlease seed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4067911/Aho\_-\_Compilers\_-\_Principles\_\_Techniques\_\_and\_Tools\_2e.pdfPlease seed!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587276</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>FooAtWFU</author>
	<datestamp>1262084640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought half the point of Chromium was to get us the HTML5 video element and bypass the Flash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought half the point of Chromium was to get us the HTML5 video element and bypass the Flash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought half the point of Chromium was to get us the HTML5 video element and bypass the Flash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30592524</id>
	<title>TOS agreement (EULA) is problematic</title>
	<author>KwKSilver</author>
	<datestamp>1259850900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The TOS Agreement looks pretty intimidating to me.  Out of curiosity I pasted it into a blank Abiword doc.  <b>Seven</b> pages of single spaced 12-point type.  Legalese.  If I need a $200-$500/hour lawyer to parse it for me, I'm not going to use it. Period.  About five paragraphs in I started to get that <i>deja vu</i> feeling, as if I were at microsoft.com or something. Yuck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The TOS Agreement looks pretty intimidating to me .
Out of curiosity I pasted it into a blank Abiword doc .
Seven pages of single spaced 12-point type .
Legalese. If I need a $ 200- $ 500/hour lawyer to parse it for me , I 'm not going to use it .
Period. About five paragraphs in I started to get that deja vu feeling , as if I were at microsoft.com or something .
Yuck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The TOS Agreement looks pretty intimidating to me.
Out of curiosity I pasted it into a blank Abiword doc.
Seven pages of single spaced 12-point type.
Legalese.  If I need a $200-$500/hour lawyer to parse it for me, I'm not going to use it.
Period.  About five paragraphs in I started to get that deja vu feeling, as if I were at microsoft.com or something.
Yuck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589182</id>
	<title>Re:Fix how it handles tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262094000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just so you know, you are a nightmare user.  You cannot actually <i>use</i> 40 browser windows. Yes, this makes you a tiny minority in a way that is insignificant to UI designers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just so you know , you are a nightmare user .
You can not actually use 40 browser windows .
Yes , this makes you a tiny minority in a way that is insignificant to UI designers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just so you know, you are a nightmare user.
You cannot actually use 40 browser windows.
Yes, this makes you a tiny minority in a way that is insignificant to UI designers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587906</id>
	<title>Chrome works great on OpenSUSE 11.2 actually!</title>
	<author>Trizicus</author>
	<datestamp>1262086800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you just fail completely at using linux. Why? Well because I'm on OpenSuse 11.2 and have Chrome running. As a matter of fact I'll provide you a picture to prove I'm 11.2, using latest Chrome and w/ working Flash, just so you don't think I'm a troll.

As a matter of fact I think this Slashdot news post is from a troll anyways.

<a href="http://i45.tinypic.com/23m770w.jpg" title="tinypic.com" rel="nofollow">http://i45.tinypic.com/23m770w.jpg</a> [tinypic.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you just fail completely at using linux .
Why ? Well because I 'm on OpenSuse 11.2 and have Chrome running .
As a matter of fact I 'll provide you a picture to prove I 'm 11.2 , using latest Chrome and w/ working Flash , just so you do n't think I 'm a troll .
As a matter of fact I think this Slashdot news post is from a troll anyways .
http : //i45.tinypic.com/23m770w.jpg [ tinypic.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you just fail completely at using linux.
Why? Well because I'm on OpenSuse 11.2 and have Chrome running.
As a matter of fact I'll provide you a picture to prove I'm 11.2, using latest Chrome and w/ working Flash, just so you don't think I'm a troll.
As a matter of fact I think this Slashdot news post is from a troll anyways.
http://i45.tinypic.com/23m770w.jpg [tinypic.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586764</id>
	<title>then take the fucking hint already...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262082300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and keep your proprietary trash away from linux.</p><p>to all of you about to respond with "this is why linux will never...": fuck you, linux doesn't need to meet your arbitrary expectations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and keep your proprietary trash away from linux.to all of you about to respond with " this is why linux will never... " : fuck you , linux does n't need to meet your arbitrary expectations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and keep your proprietary trash away from linux.to all of you about to respond with "this is why linux will never...": fuck you, linux doesn't need to meet your arbitrary expectations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591378</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>mcrbids</author>
	<datestamp>1259832360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I don't get what's so hard about this.</i></p><p>And that's probably due to your lack of any meaningful information about the problem. Typically when there is a solution to the problem that seems simple and trivial, and the people involved are morons for not implementing it, it's because those implementation details are more significant than your understanding would allow.</p><p>But here's a hint: simple problems are generally solved quickly. Complex problems are generally solved slowly. When you see reasonably bright people working on a problem that doesn't get solved quickly, you can be sure that it's not what you think!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't get what 's so hard about this.And that 's probably due to your lack of any meaningful information about the problem .
Typically when there is a solution to the problem that seems simple and trivial , and the people involved are morons for not implementing it , it 's because those implementation details are more significant than your understanding would allow.But here 's a hint : simple problems are generally solved quickly .
Complex problems are generally solved slowly .
When you see reasonably bright people working on a problem that does n't get solved quickly , you can be sure that it 's not what you think !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't get what's so hard about this.And that's probably due to your lack of any meaningful information about the problem.
Typically when there is a solution to the problem that seems simple and trivial, and the people involved are morons for not implementing it, it's because those implementation details are more significant than your understanding would allow.But here's a hint: simple problems are generally solved quickly.
Complex problems are generally solved slowly.
When you see reasonably bright people working on a problem that doesn't get solved quickly, you can be sure that it's not what you think!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589202</id>
	<title>Re:RSS in Chrome</title>
	<author>Rich0</author>
	<datestamp>1262094180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frankly, I'd consider RSS as an add-on a feature, not a bug.</p><p>The whole reason firefox was written was because mozilla became bloated with all kinds of junk, and was slower than molasses.</p><p>The whole reason chrome is being written is that firefox today is what mozilla used to be.</p><p>I just want a program that can render webpages.  Sure, have a way to put in extensions, but let's keep the core simple!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frankly , I 'd consider RSS as an add-on a feature , not a bug.The whole reason firefox was written was because mozilla became bloated with all kinds of junk , and was slower than molasses.The whole reason chrome is being written is that firefox today is what mozilla used to be.I just want a program that can render webpages .
Sure , have a way to put in extensions , but let 's keep the core simple !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frankly, I'd consider RSS as an add-on a feature, not a bug.The whole reason firefox was written was because mozilla became bloated with all kinds of junk, and was slower than molasses.The whole reason chrome is being written is that firefox today is what mozilla used to be.I just want a program that can render webpages.
Sure, have a way to put in extensions, but let's keep the core simple!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588966</id>
	<title>It's splendid</title>
	<author>frambris</author>
	<datestamp>1262092380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have been using it almost exclusively for a couple of weeks now and I really like it. My internet-bank is the one thing that does not work 100\%. GMail is so fast that I have switched from Thunderbird to using GMail in Chrome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been using it almost exclusively for a couple of weeks now and I really like it .
My internet-bank is the one thing that does not work 100 \ % .
GMail is so fast that I have switched from Thunderbird to using GMail in Chrome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been using it almost exclusively for a couple of weeks now and I really like it.
My internet-bank is the one thing that does not work 100\%.
GMail is so fast that I have switched from Thunderbird to using GMail in Chrome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30590790</id>
	<title>GTK</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262110560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The GTK integration is half assed.. how about making the tab shape follow the theme correctly for a start.  Oh and my menubar picks up the wrong colour &amp; the scrollbars are wrong.  There are multiple other GTK issues.  Firefox (at least v3) gets this stuff right, I will stick with that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The GTK integration is half assed.. how about making the tab shape follow the theme correctly for a start .
Oh and my menubar picks up the wrong colour &amp; the scrollbars are wrong .
There are multiple other GTK issues .
Firefox ( at least v3 ) gets this stuff right , I will stick with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GTK integration is half assed.. how about making the tab shape follow the theme correctly for a start.
Oh and my menubar picks up the wrong colour &amp; the scrollbars are wrong.
There are multiple other GTK issues.
Firefox (at least v3) gets this stuff right, I will stick with that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589038</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1262092860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who uses flash on youtube if you have chrome?  Just install the <a href="https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/kchoimdlcbapmcdnheaahjcdpdjdpfco" title="google.com"> youtube html5-ifier</a> [google.com].  Cuts CPU usage in half, works with most videos, and eliminates the need for flash or extra plugins to download the video-- just rightclick--&gt; save.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who uses flash on youtube if you have chrome ?
Just install the youtube html5-ifier [ google.com ] .
Cuts CPU usage in half , works with most videos , and eliminates the need for flash or extra plugins to download the video-- just rightclick-- &gt; save .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who uses flash on youtube if you have chrome?
Just install the  youtube html5-ifier [google.com].
Cuts CPU usage in half, works with most videos, and eliminates the need for flash or extra plugins to download the video-- just rightclick--&gt; save.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586572</id>
	<title>Mostly good here.</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1262081400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm running Chrome in Ubuntu under Gnome and Compiz, I have Adobe's flash installed from restricted and swfdec removed (was blocking Adobe's) and all the extensions I've tried work: Feedly, Chromed Bird, Adblock, and so on.  The only thing I notice about Flash (it even plays video fine!) is that sometimes input events such as clicking on a button in a flash element will "fall through" and not do anything.  Annoying when your trying to select another YouTube video after the current one has finished playing.  Overall though, my opinion is that it is already in an excellent state and can only get better from here: in active development.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm running Chrome in Ubuntu under Gnome and Compiz , I have Adobe 's flash installed from restricted and swfdec removed ( was blocking Adobe 's ) and all the extensions I 've tried work : Feedly , Chromed Bird , Adblock , and so on .
The only thing I notice about Flash ( it even plays video fine !
) is that sometimes input events such as clicking on a button in a flash element will " fall through " and not do anything .
Annoying when your trying to select another YouTube video after the current one has finished playing .
Overall though , my opinion is that it is already in an excellent state and can only get better from here : in active development .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm running Chrome in Ubuntu under Gnome and Compiz, I have Adobe's flash installed from restricted and swfdec removed (was blocking Adobe's) and all the extensions I've tried work: Feedly, Chromed Bird, Adblock, and so on.
The only thing I notice about Flash (it even plays video fine!
) is that sometimes input events such as clicking on a button in a flash element will "fall through" and not do anything.
Annoying when your trying to select another YouTube video after the current one has finished playing.
Overall though, my opinion is that it is already in an excellent state and can only get better from here: in active development.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586436</id>
	<title>sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262080680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>who really cares? it's beta.. you don't like it? don't use it. You like it? fine, use it. geeshh..... and to bitch about the lack of KDE integration.. who cares? really. It doesn't integrate with my desktop and you don't see me bitching to my mother about it</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>who really cares ?
it 's beta.. you do n't like it ?
do n't use it .
You like it ?
fine , use it .
geeshh..... and to bitch about the lack of KDE integration.. who cares ?
really. It does n't integrate with my desktop and you do n't see me bitching to my mother about it</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who really cares?
it's beta.. you don't like it?
don't use it.
You like it?
fine, use it.
geeshh..... and to bitch about the lack of KDE integration.. who cares?
really. It doesn't integrate with my desktop and you don't see me bitching to my mother about it</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591164</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1259870880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>YouTube's quality is crap (even with H.264), the interface is crap, the comments are crap, the recommendations are crap, the URL scheme is crap...  Do I need to continue?</p><p>YouTube is the lowest-common-denominator...  Anything you find there, can be found in vastly better quality elsewhere, in a better format, etc.</p><p>I dream of a world without YouTube, and I doubt it'll take long for it to happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>YouTube 's quality is crap ( even with H.264 ) , the interface is crap , the comments are crap , the recommendations are crap , the URL scheme is crap... Do I need to continue ? YouTube is the lowest-common-denominator... Anything you find there , can be found in vastly better quality elsewhere , in a better format , etc.I dream of a world without YouTube , and I doubt it 'll take long for it to happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>YouTube's quality is crap (even with H.264), the interface is crap, the comments are crap, the recommendations are crap, the URL scheme is crap...  Do I need to continue?YouTube is the lowest-common-denominator...  Anything you find there, can be found in vastly better quality elsewhere, in a better format, etc.I dream of a world without YouTube, and I doubt it'll take long for it to happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586824</id>
	<title>Chrome + Karmic or PCLinuxOS</title>
	<author>psbrogna</author>
	<datestamp>1262082600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My experience with the latest version of Chrome on Ubuntu 9.10 &amp; PCLinuxOS 2009 (.10?) has been an enjoyable one. I've had no problems with Flash and use an ad blocking extension &amp; Firebug (which I like better than Firebug in Firebox).

No need to beat the dead horse, but yes, it's sooo much more responsive than other browsers and the efficient use of screen real estate appeals to me as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My experience with the latest version of Chrome on Ubuntu 9.10 &amp; PCLinuxOS 2009 ( .10 ?
) has been an enjoyable one .
I 've had no problems with Flash and use an ad blocking extension &amp; Firebug ( which I like better than Firebug in Firebox ) .
No need to beat the dead horse , but yes , it 's sooo much more responsive than other browsers and the efficient use of screen real estate appeals to me as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My experience with the latest version of Chrome on Ubuntu 9.10 &amp; PCLinuxOS 2009 (.10?
) has been an enjoyable one.
I've had no problems with Flash and use an ad blocking extension &amp; Firebug (which I like better than Firebug in Firebox).
No need to beat the dead horse, but yes, it's sooo much more responsive than other browsers and the efficient use of screen real estate appeals to me as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30590000</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262101680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think you get just what <a href="http://193.180.78.90/.demo/nx2/" title="193.180.78.90" rel="nofollow">weird things</a> [193.180.78.90] you're allowed to do with XUL, and how closely tied it is to the HTML parser. From my understanding, Firefox is just a glorified HTML, I mean XUL, application written in Javascript that can call C++ libraries. For your suggestion to make any sense I think you'd need to compile the whole web<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think you get just what weird things [ 193.180.78.90 ] you 're allowed to do with XUL , and how closely tied it is to the HTML parser .
From my understanding , Firefox is just a glorified HTML , I mean XUL , application written in Javascript that can call C + + libraries .
For your suggestion to make any sense I think you 'd need to compile the whole web ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think you get just what weird things [193.180.78.90] you're allowed to do with XUL, and how closely tied it is to the HTML parser.
From my understanding, Firefox is just a glorified HTML, I mean XUL, application written in Javascript that can call C++ libraries.
For your suggestion to make any sense I think you'd need to compile the whole web ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588422</id>
	<title>gmail errors</title>
	<author>strikeoncmputrz</author>
	<datestamp>1262089320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When running chrome on my ubuntu box, gmail throws more errors then my first java app. Anyone else encounter this?</htmltext>
<tokenext>When running chrome on my ubuntu box , gmail throws more errors then my first java app .
Anyone else encounter this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When running chrome on my ubuntu box, gmail throws more errors then my first java app.
Anyone else encounter this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587188</id>
	<title>Re:Fix how it handles tabs</title>
	<author>oatworm</author>
	<datestamp>1262084340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've used tab saving before when I want to shut my computer off for the night but I have some tabs open with information I want to re-visit the next morning.  That way I can finish reading what I was looking through without changing my home page(s) over and over again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've used tab saving before when I want to shut my computer off for the night but I have some tabs open with information I want to re-visit the next morning .
That way I can finish reading what I was looking through without changing my home page ( s ) over and over again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've used tab saving before when I want to shut my computer off for the night but I have some tabs open with information I want to re-visit the next morning.
That way I can finish reading what I was looking through without changing my home page(s) over and over again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586412</id>
	<title>so you don't use it yet are somehow qualifed?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262080560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>slashdot?  Oh, nevermind !!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>slashdot ?
Oh , nevermind !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>slashdot?
Oh, nevermind !
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586926</id>
	<title>Chromium daily PPA on Ubuntu wins</title>
	<author>David Gerard</author>
	<datestamp>1262083200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use the Chromium <a href="https://launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/ppa" title="launchpad.net">daily dev PPA</a> [launchpad.net] on Ubuntu Karmic and it's great. I'm using it now. I use Firefox for work browsing and Chromium for personal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use the Chromium daily dev PPA [ launchpad.net ] on Ubuntu Karmic and it 's great .
I 'm using it now .
I use Firefox for work browsing and Chromium for personal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use the Chromium daily dev PPA [launchpad.net] on Ubuntu Karmic and it's great.
I'm using it now.
I use Firefox for work browsing and Chromium for personal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588518</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>Anonymous Cowpart</author>
	<datestamp>1262089860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But you could even try to optimize it. Convert it to byte or machine in run time, or something. </p></div><p>If you think it's all so damn straightforward and easy, why don't you submit a patch?<br>
Oh, but you don't write code? You don't wish to spend your own time on it? You're just too bloody lazy?<br> <br>

Sheesh...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But you could even try to optimize it .
Convert it to byte or machine in run time , or something .
If you think it 's all so damn straightforward and easy , why do n't you submit a patch ?
Oh , but you do n't write code ?
You do n't wish to spend your own time on it ?
You 're just too bloody lazy ?
Sheesh.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But you could even try to optimize it.
Convert it to byte or machine in run time, or something.
If you think it's all so damn straightforward and easy, why don't you submit a patch?
Oh, but you don't write code?
You don't wish to spend your own time on it?
You're just too bloody lazy?
Sheesh...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591680</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1259837220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Just compile the damn stuff into something faster! Like a library, but a bit safer (sandboxed).</i>
<p>
It already does. On first boot XUL / JS is parsed into objects which are serialized as prototypes into XUL.mfl where mfl stands for Mozilla Fast Load. The next time the app starts it constructs the prototypes from the fast load file rather than the XML. The mfl file is regenerated when the XUL changes of course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just compile the damn stuff into something faster !
Like a library , but a bit safer ( sandboxed ) .
It already does .
On first boot XUL / JS is parsed into objects which are serialized as prototypes into XUL.mfl where mfl stands for Mozilla Fast Load .
The next time the app starts it constructs the prototypes from the fast load file rather than the XML .
The mfl file is regenerated when the XUL changes of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just compile the damn stuff into something faster!
Like a library, but a bit safer (sandboxed).
It already does.
On first boot XUL / JS is parsed into objects which are serialized as prototypes into XUL.mfl where mfl stands for Mozilla Fast Load.
The next time the app starts it constructs the prototypes from the fast load file rather than the XML.
The mfl file is regenerated when the XUL changes of course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586762</id>
	<title>Google Chrome is already a good browser.</title>
	<author>miffo.swe</author>
	<datestamp>1262082300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I run Google Chrome 4.0.266.0 on Debian Lenny and my experiences so far has been very good. Plugins in general works just fine, even flash.</p><p>I really dont care for "integrated" apps. I want an application to do what its supposed to and do it well. The only thing important is to be able to export stuff in a readable open format. Chrome is by far the best browser i have ever used and the worst thing that could happen to it is if it becomes Gnome/KDE/windows-ified like firefox or konqueror.</p><p>Once enough people gets their eye on Google Chrome/Chromium i think both Firefox and IE is in for a ride. Especially on Linux since mozilla seems to view Linux as a sideshow project nowadays, atleast for a bystander. I mean, after this time shouldnt it atleast keep systemwide settings in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/firefox?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I run Google Chrome 4.0.266.0 on Debian Lenny and my experiences so far has been very good .
Plugins in general works just fine , even flash.I really dont care for " integrated " apps .
I want an application to do what its supposed to and do it well .
The only thing important is to be able to export stuff in a readable open format .
Chrome is by far the best browser i have ever used and the worst thing that could happen to it is if it becomes Gnome/KDE/windows-ified like firefox or konqueror.Once enough people gets their eye on Google Chrome/Chromium i think both Firefox and IE is in for a ride .
Especially on Linux since mozilla seems to view Linux as a sideshow project nowadays , atleast for a bystander .
I mean , after this time shouldnt it atleast keep systemwide settings in /etc/firefox ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I run Google Chrome 4.0.266.0 on Debian Lenny and my experiences so far has been very good.
Plugins in general works just fine, even flash.I really dont care for "integrated" apps.
I want an application to do what its supposed to and do it well.
The only thing important is to be able to export stuff in a readable open format.
Chrome is by far the best browser i have ever used and the worst thing that could happen to it is if it becomes Gnome/KDE/windows-ified like firefox or konqueror.Once enough people gets their eye on Google Chrome/Chromium i think both Firefox and IE is in for a ride.
Especially on Linux since mozilla seems to view Linux as a sideshow project nowadays, atleast for a bystander.
I mean, after this time shouldnt it atleast keep systemwide settings in /etc/firefox?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586852</id>
	<title>RSS in Chrome</title>
	<author>John Whitley</author>
	<datestamp>1262082780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's worth noting that RSS support is an <a href="https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/nlbjncdgjeocebhnmkbbbdekmmmcbfjd" title="google.com">extension for Chrome</a> [google.com], written by Google.  It presents the usual RSS location bar icon, and is configurable:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The extension comes with 4 feed readers predefined (Google Reader, iGoogle, Bloglines and My Yahoo) but also allows you to add any web-based feed reader of your choice to the list.</p></div><p>No RSS-as-bookmark folders support, but I don't miss that as I vastly prefer a dedicated (desktop or webapp) RSS reader.</p><p>Works great for me on Linux.  OS X users will need to grab a dev channel build for extensions support; the usual disclaimers about unreleased code apply.  The recent Mac Chrome release doesn't have extensions turned on yet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's worth noting that RSS support is an extension for Chrome [ google.com ] , written by Google .
It presents the usual RSS location bar icon , and is configurable : The extension comes with 4 feed readers predefined ( Google Reader , iGoogle , Bloglines and My Yahoo ) but also allows you to add any web-based feed reader of your choice to the list.No RSS-as-bookmark folders support , but I do n't miss that as I vastly prefer a dedicated ( desktop or webapp ) RSS reader.Works great for me on Linux .
OS X users will need to grab a dev channel build for extensions support ; the usual disclaimers about unreleased code apply .
The recent Mac Chrome release does n't have extensions turned on yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's worth noting that RSS support is an extension for Chrome [google.com], written by Google.
It presents the usual RSS location bar icon, and is configurable:The extension comes with 4 feed readers predefined (Google Reader, iGoogle, Bloglines and My Yahoo) but also allows you to add any web-based feed reader of your choice to the list.No RSS-as-bookmark folders support, but I don't miss that as I vastly prefer a dedicated (desktop or webapp) RSS reader.Works great for me on Linux.
OS X users will need to grab a dev channel build for extensions support; the usual disclaimers about unreleased code apply.
The recent Mac Chrome release doesn't have extensions turned on yet.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586580</id>
	<title>How it works</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262081400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Windows doesn't support an application and Linux does, Windows has a problem.<br>If Linux doesn't support an application and Windows does, the application has a problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Windows does n't support an application and Linux does , Windows has a problem.If Linux does n't support an application and Windows does , the application has a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Windows doesn't support an application and Linux does, Windows has a problem.If Linux doesn't support an application and Windows does, the application has a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591832</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1259840580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The responsiveness of Firefox is just fine on any modern PC (i.e. made in the last 5 years). I even use it on a Asus Eee 701 netbook and it's still usable although it suffers from the small cramped display.
<p>
Google Chrome certainly starts faster and feels a small bit more responsive but these are hardly deal breakers IMO. As a prospective user I would be more concerned about the amount of information you'd be feeding Google just by using their browser. Now they have the potential to see EVERYWHERE you go, not just what you choose to search for through their site.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The responsiveness of Firefox is just fine on any modern PC ( i.e .
made in the last 5 years ) .
I even use it on a Asus Eee 701 netbook and it 's still usable although it suffers from the small cramped display .
Google Chrome certainly starts faster and feels a small bit more responsive but these are hardly deal breakers IMO .
As a prospective user I would be more concerned about the amount of information you 'd be feeding Google just by using their browser .
Now they have the potential to see EVERYWHERE you go , not just what you choose to search for through their site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The responsiveness of Firefox is just fine on any modern PC (i.e.
made in the last 5 years).
I even use it on a Asus Eee 701 netbook and it's still usable although it suffers from the small cramped display.
Google Chrome certainly starts faster and feels a small bit more responsive but these are hardly deal breakers IMO.
As a prospective user I would be more concerned about the amount of information you'd be feeding Google just by using their browser.
Now they have the potential to see EVERYWHERE you go, not just what you choose to search for through their site.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587420</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262085060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The original post said:</p><blockquote><div><p>Convert it to byte or machine in run time, or something.</p></div></blockquote><p>This would make it go faster, but you are still held back by how good the compiler is at translating the high level language to machine code.  C &amp; C++ compilers have been around for a long time and subject to much research so are quite good at their job.  XUL is much newer and much higher level, so compilation probably still isn't that great and will rely on newer research.</p><p>The other thing is that compilation at install time avoids a startup wait, but also doesn't give the app a chance to profile and optimise the executing code.  Something like a JIT which then keeps the results for future sessions is probably close to what you want without adding too much complexity, although means the first ever run of some new code branch will be a slow path (often seen with the pause when opening a new dialog in a Java app which is yet to be fully loaded and optimised).</p><p>It'll take a while and a fair amount of research for XUL to get upto native speeds and have a level footing against things like GTK+, but I don't think its impossible.  Hopefully the implementation/debugging/portability gains Firefox gets from XUL allow time to be spent improving that technology.</p><p>THX138</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The original post said : Convert it to byte or machine in run time , or something.This would make it go faster , but you are still held back by how good the compiler is at translating the high level language to machine code .
C &amp; C + + compilers have been around for a long time and subject to much research so are quite good at their job .
XUL is much newer and much higher level , so compilation probably still is n't that great and will rely on newer research.The other thing is that compilation at install time avoids a startup wait , but also does n't give the app a chance to profile and optimise the executing code .
Something like a JIT which then keeps the results for future sessions is probably close to what you want without adding too much complexity , although means the first ever run of some new code branch will be a slow path ( often seen with the pause when opening a new dialog in a Java app which is yet to be fully loaded and optimised ) .It 'll take a while and a fair amount of research for XUL to get upto native speeds and have a level footing against things like GTK + , but I do n't think its impossible .
Hopefully the implementation/debugging/portability gains Firefox gets from XUL allow time to be spent improving that technology.THX138</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original post said:Convert it to byte or machine in run time, or something.This would make it go faster, but you are still held back by how good the compiler is at translating the high level language to machine code.
C &amp; C++ compilers have been around for a long time and subject to much research so are quite good at their job.
XUL is much newer and much higher level, so compilation probably still isn't that great and will rely on newer research.The other thing is that compilation at install time avoids a startup wait, but also doesn't give the app a chance to profile and optimise the executing code.
Something like a JIT which then keeps the results for future sessions is probably close to what you want without adding too much complexity, although means the first ever run of some new code branch will be a slow path (often seen with the pause when opening a new dialog in a Java app which is yet to be fully loaded and optimised).It'll take a while and a fair amount of research for XUL to get upto native speeds and have a level footing against things like GTK+, but I don't think its impossible.
Hopefully the implementation/debugging/portability gains Firefox gets from XUL allow time to be spent improving that technology.THX138
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30601272</id>
	<title>Re:Getting Flash to Work</title>
	<author>Simetrical</author>
	<datestamp>1259845980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I had two systems, both 64-bit Fedora, that I tried Chrome on. On one, Flash worked fine from the moment I installed Chrome. On the other, Chrome didn't even notice the plugin existed. Flash (32-bit, wrapped with mozilla-plugin-config) worked just fine in Firefox on both computers.  When I compared the two systems, it turned out that one was missing a symbolic link. The file is in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins-wrapped, but Chrome was looking in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins.</p><p>Adding a symbolic link solved it.</p><p>More info: <a href="http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2009/12/09/64bit-chrome-flash/" title="hyperborea.org">Getting Flash to work on Google Chrome for 64-bit Linux</a> [hyperborea.org].</p></div><p>Did you <a href="http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/entry?template=Defect\%20on\%20Linux" title="google.com">report the bug</a> [google.com]?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had two systems , both 64-bit Fedora , that I tried Chrome on .
On one , Flash worked fine from the moment I installed Chrome .
On the other , Chrome did n't even notice the plugin existed .
Flash ( 32-bit , wrapped with mozilla-plugin-config ) worked just fine in Firefox on both computers .
When I compared the two systems , it turned out that one was missing a symbolic link .
The file is in /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins-wrapped , but Chrome was looking in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins.Adding a symbolic link solved it.More info : Getting Flash to work on Google Chrome for 64-bit Linux [ hyperborea.org ] .Did you report the bug [ google.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had two systems, both 64-bit Fedora, that I tried Chrome on.
On one, Flash worked fine from the moment I installed Chrome.
On the other, Chrome didn't even notice the plugin existed.
Flash (32-bit, wrapped with mozilla-plugin-config) worked just fine in Firefox on both computers.
When I compared the two systems, it turned out that one was missing a symbolic link.
The file is in /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins-wrapped, but Chrome was looking in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins.Adding a symbolic link solved it.More info: Getting Flash to work on Google Chrome for 64-bit Linux [hyperborea.org].Did you report the bug [google.com]?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587732</id>
	<title>Just Like Firefox,</title>
	<author>Youngbull</author>
	<datestamp>1262086200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>chrome has rss support through an <a href="https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/kghdjdlccddmkepckhfgjdeohkcabahl" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">extension.</a> [google.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>chrome has rss support through an extension .
[ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>chrome has rss support through an extension.
[google.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374</id>
	<title>UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262080440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Speed</p><p>If you look for a fast web browser, Google Chrome is the answer to you. The start-up speed is amazing comparing to Firefox. The Google developers did a very well job in this regard. the reason behind its speed is that Google Chrome does not use a cross-platform framework unlike Firefox which uses XUL. Google Chrome in GUN/Linux uses GTK+ directly without any layer in between.  It uses also a different GUI library for each operating system it supports.</p></div><p>While I dont myself use Chrome, I have to agree here. UI responsiveness in such things like a browser is REALLY important. I have asked firefox developers and users many times why the UI isn't more responsive, and the sum answer of that is XUL. I love Opera's UI responsiveness. I love Chrome's UI responsivess. But Firefox's and IE's is just shit. It's really something Mozilla should work with, because until it's on those twos level I wont be using Firefox. What is the real reason to use it then? Many people say its easily extensible. sure, XML like language probably is. But you could even try to optimize it. Convert it to byte or machine in run time, or something. Firefox is really lacking behind on this aspect and I'd really like to see them improve it.</p><p>But why are both Opera and Chrome better in UI responsiveness than Firefox, IE and other problems? Is it because they see the advantage on it, or is it really that hard? What could be done for it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>SpeedIf you look for a fast web browser , Google Chrome is the answer to you .
The start-up speed is amazing comparing to Firefox .
The Google developers did a very well job in this regard .
the reason behind its speed is that Google Chrome does not use a cross-platform framework unlike Firefox which uses XUL .
Google Chrome in GUN/Linux uses GTK + directly without any layer in between .
It uses also a different GUI library for each operating system it supports.While I dont myself use Chrome , I have to agree here .
UI responsiveness in such things like a browser is REALLY important .
I have asked firefox developers and users many times why the UI is n't more responsive , and the sum answer of that is XUL .
I love Opera 's UI responsiveness .
I love Chrome 's UI responsivess .
But Firefox 's and IE 's is just shit .
It 's really something Mozilla should work with , because until it 's on those twos level I wont be using Firefox .
What is the real reason to use it then ?
Many people say its easily extensible .
sure , XML like language probably is .
But you could even try to optimize it .
Convert it to byte or machine in run time , or something .
Firefox is really lacking behind on this aspect and I 'd really like to see them improve it.But why are both Opera and Chrome better in UI responsiveness than Firefox , IE and other problems ?
Is it because they see the advantage on it , or is it really that hard ?
What could be done for it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SpeedIf you look for a fast web browser, Google Chrome is the answer to you.
The start-up speed is amazing comparing to Firefox.
The Google developers did a very well job in this regard.
the reason behind its speed is that Google Chrome does not use a cross-platform framework unlike Firefox which uses XUL.
Google Chrome in GUN/Linux uses GTK+ directly without any layer in between.
It uses also a different GUI library for each operating system it supports.While I dont myself use Chrome, I have to agree here.
UI responsiveness in such things like a browser is REALLY important.
I have asked firefox developers and users many times why the UI isn't more responsive, and the sum answer of that is XUL.
I love Opera's UI responsiveness.
I love Chrome's UI responsivess.
But Firefox's and IE's is just shit.
It's really something Mozilla should work with, because until it's on those twos level I wont be using Firefox.
What is the real reason to use it then?
Many people say its easily extensible.
sure, XML like language probably is.
But you could even try to optimize it.
Convert it to byte or machine in run time, or something.
Firefox is really lacking behind on this aspect and I'd really like to see them improve it.But why are both Opera and Chrome better in UI responsiveness than Firefox, IE and other problems?
Is it because they see the advantage on it, or is it really that hard?
What could be done for it?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586842</id>
	<title>Re:Not Chrome's Fault</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1262082720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this not modded Troll or Flamebait?</p><p>Chrome largely looks the same on Windows and Linux. Firefox used to, but Mozilla has been working to make Firefox on each platform look more integrated.</p><p>I happen to believe KDE 4.3 looks as good as any desktop on the planet. There are plenty of great looking Linux apps. I say that as a guy who spends 90\% of his time in Windows between my two jobs, and runs both Windows 7 and openSUSE at home.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this not modded Troll or Flamebait ? Chrome largely looks the same on Windows and Linux .
Firefox used to , but Mozilla has been working to make Firefox on each platform look more integrated.I happen to believe KDE 4.3 looks as good as any desktop on the planet .
There are plenty of great looking Linux apps .
I say that as a guy who spends 90 \ % of his time in Windows between my two jobs , and runs both Windows 7 and openSUSE at home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this not modded Troll or Flamebait?Chrome largely looks the same on Windows and Linux.
Firefox used to, but Mozilla has been working to make Firefox on each platform look more integrated.I happen to believe KDE 4.3 looks as good as any desktop on the planet.
There are plenty of great looking Linux apps.
I say that as a guy who spends 90\% of his time in Windows between my two jobs, and runs both Windows 7 and openSUSE at home.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586956</id>
	<title>Re:Flash works fine...</title>
	<author>Hel Toupee</author>
	<datestamp>1262083380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Flash works as well in Chrome as it does in Firefox.  Flash performance on Linux is far below what I would consider "fine".  At least in Chrome, when Flash starts gobbling up RAM and CPU, you just lose the one tab, and not the entire browser.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash works as well in Chrome as it does in Firefox .
Flash performance on Linux is far below what I would consider " fine " .
At least in Chrome , when Flash starts gobbling up RAM and CPU , you just lose the one tab , and not the entire browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash works as well in Chrome as it does in Firefox.
Flash performance on Linux is far below what I would consider "fine".
At least in Chrome, when Flash starts gobbling up RAM and CPU, you just lose the one tab, and not the entire browser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588254</id>
	<title>Worked great for me</title>
	<author>tgetzoya</author>
	<datestamp>1262088420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use Chrome on both Windows and Ubuntu 9.10 and I haven't had a single problem on either.  I use a 5 year old laptop as my everyday computer and FF loads so slow it drives me mad; Opera isn't much better.  Chrome loads so fast it feels instantaneous.  Once I installed the flash plugin from adobe for FF, it was available for Chrome as well.  I'm not much of an extensions guy, but everything that is in a default Windows install is there in Ubuntu as well so that works fine for me.
<br> <br>
As for integrating with KDE, why not just use Konqueror?  Both are Webkit/KHTL browsers.....the only thing you're going to get from Chrome that you won't from Konqueror is a gtk based Webkit browser as opposed to a KDElib based one.  I'm sure there are some other differences between WebKit and KHTML but it really just comes down to the UI
<br> <br>
Chrome for Gnome/gtk based gui and Konqueror for KDE makes enough sense.
<br> <br>
The lack of RSS is just stupid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Chrome on both Windows and Ubuntu 9.10 and I have n't had a single problem on either .
I use a 5 year old laptop as my everyday computer and FF loads so slow it drives me mad ; Opera is n't much better .
Chrome loads so fast it feels instantaneous .
Once I installed the flash plugin from adobe for FF , it was available for Chrome as well .
I 'm not much of an extensions guy , but everything that is in a default Windows install is there in Ubuntu as well so that works fine for me .
As for integrating with KDE , why not just use Konqueror ?
Both are Webkit/KHTL browsers.....the only thing you 're going to get from Chrome that you wo n't from Konqueror is a gtk based Webkit browser as opposed to a KDElib based one .
I 'm sure there are some other differences between WebKit and KHTML but it really just comes down to the UI Chrome for Gnome/gtk based gui and Konqueror for KDE makes enough sense .
The lack of RSS is just stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Chrome on both Windows and Ubuntu 9.10 and I haven't had a single problem on either.
I use a 5 year old laptop as my everyday computer and FF loads so slow it drives me mad; Opera isn't much better.
Chrome loads so fast it feels instantaneous.
Once I installed the flash plugin from adobe for FF, it was available for Chrome as well.
I'm not much of an extensions guy, but everything that is in a default Windows install is there in Ubuntu as well so that works fine for me.
As for integrating with KDE, why not just use Konqueror?
Both are Webkit/KHTL browsers.....the only thing you're going to get from Chrome that you won't from Konqueror is a gtk based Webkit browser as opposed to a KDElib based one.
I'm sure there are some other differences between WebKit and KHTML but it really just comes down to the UI
 
Chrome for Gnome/gtk based gui and Konqueror for KDE makes enough sense.
The lack of RSS is just stupid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586992</id>
	<title>Re:Fix how it handles tabs</title>
	<author>diamondsandrain</author>
	<datestamp>1262083560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its just like when KDE saves the programs that I have open so the same programs open up again when I restart KDE. Its a convenience thing. If I am going to spend the time opening up all the same programs/tabs again then I am going to be annoyed that they were all closed at the end of my last session. There are quite a few pages that I like to visit/refresh on a regular basis, including slashdot, and I wouldn't want to have to open up everything again every time the browser opens. Yes, there is a performance hit on startup but I take that as a small price to pay for everything just being there. Also, I keep open stuff that I deem not quite worthy of bookmarks that I still would like to see again. Kind of an, oh yeah, reminder that I have something to do associated with it. These things would be lost and I wouldn't likely remember them again. I realize that I could be bookmarking groups of tabs, but I like this better. You can still do that right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its just like when KDE saves the programs that I have open so the same programs open up again when I restart KDE .
Its a convenience thing .
If I am going to spend the time opening up all the same programs/tabs again then I am going to be annoyed that they were all closed at the end of my last session .
There are quite a few pages that I like to visit/refresh on a regular basis , including slashdot , and I would n't want to have to open up everything again every time the browser opens .
Yes , there is a performance hit on startup but I take that as a small price to pay for everything just being there .
Also , I keep open stuff that I deem not quite worthy of bookmarks that I still would like to see again .
Kind of an , oh yeah , reminder that I have something to do associated with it .
These things would be lost and I would n't likely remember them again .
I realize that I could be bookmarking groups of tabs , but I like this better .
You can still do that right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its just like when KDE saves the programs that I have open so the same programs open up again when I restart KDE.
Its a convenience thing.
If I am going to spend the time opening up all the same programs/tabs again then I am going to be annoyed that they were all closed at the end of my last session.
There are quite a few pages that I like to visit/refresh on a regular basis, including slashdot, and I wouldn't want to have to open up everything again every time the browser opens.
Yes, there is a performance hit on startup but I take that as a small price to pay for everything just being there.
Also, I keep open stuff that I deem not quite worthy of bookmarks that I still would like to see again.
Kind of an, oh yeah, reminder that I have something to do associated with it.
These things would be lost and I wouldn't likely remember them again.
I realize that I could be bookmarking groups of tabs, but I like this better.
You can still do that right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589386</id>
	<title>Piss poor reasoning in the summery</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262096040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> I didn't succeed in using Flash Player on Google Chrome beta 1 (I am using OpenSUSE 11.2) and I wonder how the quality of Google Chrome OS will be, especially if it's based on Linux and Google Chrome.</p></div><p>So the fact that you were unable to make the beta version of chrome work on an as-yet unsupported linux distro means you assume that the authors of chrome won't bother to make a supported release work on their own linux distro?  I was going to write a list of ways you might reasonably come to this conclusion, but it is so much easier to simply point out that you are an idiot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't succeed in using Flash Player on Google Chrome beta 1 ( I am using OpenSUSE 11.2 ) and I wonder how the quality of Google Chrome OS will be , especially if it 's based on Linux and Google Chrome.So the fact that you were unable to make the beta version of chrome work on an as-yet unsupported linux distro means you assume that the authors of chrome wo n't bother to make a supported release work on their own linux distro ?
I was going to write a list of ways you might reasonably come to this conclusion , but it is so much easier to simply point out that you are an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I didn't succeed in using Flash Player on Google Chrome beta 1 (I am using OpenSUSE 11.2) and I wonder how the quality of Google Chrome OS will be, especially if it's based on Linux and Google Chrome.So the fact that you were unable to make the beta version of chrome work on an as-yet unsupported linux distro means you assume that the authors of chrome won't bother to make a supported release work on their own linux distro?
I was going to write a list of ways you might reasonably come to this conclusion, but it is so much easier to simply point out that you are an idiot.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586532</id>
	<title>It's a beta?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262081160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given how Chrome, at least on Linux, is doing everything it needs to do just fine (quite well actually) I always wonder why it's not an official release yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given how Chrome , at least on Linux , is doing everything it needs to do just fine ( quite well actually ) I always wonder why it 's not an official release yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given how Chrome, at least on Linux, is doing everything it needs to do just fine (quite well actually) I always wonder why it's not an official release yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591652</id>
	<title>Could be better (flash works BTW).</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1259836860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flash is working for me, in Ubuntu 9.10, out of the box, no need to fix anything (Opera mostly works, but misses clicks of the mouse, it makes Flash unusable, I haven't seen this solved or even reported yet).</p><p>Two minor gripes:</p><p>- Bookmark management is crap. In both Firefox and Opera you can list bookmarks by different criteria (alphabetically, by last time of access, by time created).</p><p>- There should be a setting to start in Incognito mode by default.</p><p>Otherwise it looks like a very capable piece of software.</p><p>So answering the posed questing, most likely Chrome OS will be a great operating system (a conclusion any sane person would arrive at by looking dispassionately at the quality of Google's release software so far).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash is working for me , in Ubuntu 9.10 , out of the box , no need to fix anything ( Opera mostly works , but misses clicks of the mouse , it makes Flash unusable , I have n't seen this solved or even reported yet ) .Two minor gripes : - Bookmark management is crap .
In both Firefox and Opera you can list bookmarks by different criteria ( alphabetically , by last time of access , by time created ) .- There should be a setting to start in Incognito mode by default.Otherwise it looks like a very capable piece of software.So answering the posed questing , most likely Chrome OS will be a great operating system ( a conclusion any sane person would arrive at by looking dispassionately at the quality of Google 's release software so far ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash is working for me, in Ubuntu 9.10, out of the box, no need to fix anything (Opera mostly works, but misses clicks of the mouse, it makes Flash unusable, I haven't seen this solved or even reported yet).Two minor gripes:- Bookmark management is crap.
In both Firefox and Opera you can list bookmarks by different criteria (alphabetically, by last time of access, by time created).- There should be a setting to start in Incognito mode by default.Otherwise it looks like a very capable piece of software.So answering the posed questing, most likely Chrome OS will be a great operating system (a conclusion any sane person would arrive at by looking dispassionately at the quality of Google's release software so far).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30590980</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Kelvie</author>
	<datestamp>1262113860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Honestly, I use KDE and I know it doesn't really look much like a GTK app, but I (and all KDE users) would \_really\_ appreciate it if it would use the KDE file dialog.

Every time the GTK+ file dialog pops up, I want to hurt an animal.  A really cute animal, if possible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , I use KDE and I know it does n't really look much like a GTK app , but I ( and all KDE users ) would \ _really \ _ appreciate it if it would use the KDE file dialog .
Every time the GTK + file dialog pops up , I want to hurt an animal .
A really cute animal , if possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, I use KDE and I know it doesn't really look much like a GTK app, but I (and all KDE users) would \_really\_ appreciate it if it would use the KDE file dialog.
Every time the GTK+ file dialog pops up, I want to hurt an animal.
A really cute animal, if possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586948</id>
	<title>Did you try the tarballs?</title>
	<author>Sits</author>
	<datestamp>1262083320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use a <a href="http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/" title="chromium.org" rel="nofollow">Chromium nightly tarball</a> [chromium.org] unpacked to a directory in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/tmp on Slackware 13.0. It wasn't straightforward but I did get it working by copying some libraries from firefox into the same directory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use a Chromium nightly tarball [ chromium.org ] unpacked to a directory in /tmp on Slackware 13.0 .
It was n't straightforward but I did get it working by copying some libraries from firefox into the same directory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use a Chromium nightly tarball [chromium.org] unpacked to a directory in /tmp on Slackware 13.0.
It wasn't straightforward but I did get it working by copying some libraries from firefox into the same directory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30592196</id>
	<title>Re:Mostly good here.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259846820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I actually installed Chrome because firefox was doing this to me under Ubuntu Karmic - yeah it's dead annoying</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually installed Chrome because firefox was doing this to me under Ubuntu Karmic - yeah it 's dead annoying</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually installed Chrome because firefox was doing this to me under Ubuntu Karmic - yeah it's dead annoying</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587162</id>
	<title>Re:Distribute glibc then ...</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1262084220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>And BTW this is an advantage of Free software as you are automatically entitled to redistributing the library yourself.</i></p><p>An advantage of Free software is that it lets you, using an arcane and complex process, fix the problem caused by using Free software in the first place?</p><p>Wow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And BTW this is an advantage of Free software as you are automatically entitled to redistributing the library yourself.An advantage of Free software is that it lets you , using an arcane and complex process , fix the problem caused by using Free software in the first place ? Wow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And BTW this is an advantage of Free software as you are automatically entitled to redistributing the library yourself.An advantage of Free software is that it lets you, using an arcane and complex process, fix the problem caused by using Free software in the first place?Wow.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586816</id>
	<title>Re:Fix how it handles tabs</title>
	<author>Anders</author>
	<datestamp>1262082540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Firefox handles this the correct way by putting arrows at the ends of the tabs and allowing you to scroll across to the remaining tabs.</p> </div><p>No, actually the <em>right</em> way is to use vertical tabs, like Opera lets you do.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Firefox handles this the correct way by putting arrows at the ends of the tabs and allowing you to scroll across to the remaining tabs .
No , actually the right way is to use vertical tabs , like Opera lets you do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firefox handles this the correct way by putting arrows at the ends of the tabs and allowing you to scroll across to the remaining tabs.
No, actually the right way is to use vertical tabs, like Opera lets you do.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262082480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don&rsquo;t know how many times I have recommended this simple and effective solution to the XUL problem:</p><p>Just <em>compile</em> the damn stuff into something faster! Like a library, but a bit safer (sandboxed).<br>Leave the XUL files where they are, monitor them with inotify or at specific events, and re-compile them if they were changed (e.g. by installing a extension. Do not accept pre-compiled stuff in an extension. That way you still get to see all the source.</p><p>There, done. I don&rsquo;t get what&rsquo;s so hard about this. The whole parsing and error handling thing is already done. Just walk the tree with functions that replace the nodes with binary code or something alike. And get the dragon book if you haven&rsquo;t already.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I don    t know how many times I have recommended this simple and effective solution to the XUL problem : Just compile the damn stuff into something faster !
Like a library , but a bit safer ( sandboxed ) .Leave the XUL files where they are , monitor them with inotify or at specific events , and re-compile them if they were changed ( e.g .
by installing a extension .
Do not accept pre-compiled stuff in an extension .
That way you still get to see all the source.There , done .
I don    t get what    s so hard about this .
The whole parsing and error handling thing is already done .
Just walk the tree with functions that replace the nodes with binary code or something alike .
And get the dragon book if you haven    t already .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don’t know how many times I have recommended this simple and effective solution to the XUL problem:Just compile the damn stuff into something faster!
Like a library, but a bit safer (sandboxed).Leave the XUL files where they are, monitor them with inotify or at specific events, and re-compile them if they were changed (e.g.
by installing a extension.
Do not accept pre-compiled stuff in an extension.
That way you still get to see all the source.There, done.
I don’t get what’s so hard about this.
The whole parsing and error handling thing is already done.
Just walk the tree with functions that replace the nodes with binary code or something alike.
And get the dragon book if you haven’t already.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586638</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>larry bagina</author>
	<datestamp>1262081640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And since Chrome OS will be a full-screen web page on top of linux, kde integration is not applicable.
<p>
It is slightly amusing that KHTML became WebKit became Chrome with GTK underneath.  At least it wasn't the windows version recompiled with WINE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And since Chrome OS will be a full-screen web page on top of linux , kde integration is not applicable .
It is slightly amusing that KHTML became WebKit became Chrome with GTK underneath .
At least it was n't the windows version recompiled with WINE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And since Chrome OS will be a full-screen web page on top of linux, kde integration is not applicable.
It is slightly amusing that KHTML became WebKit became Chrome with GTK underneath.
At least it wasn't the windows version recompiled with WINE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591740</id>
	<title>upgrade away from OpenSUSE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259838360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe OpenSUSE is your problem.  It is just so out of date and purely constructed.  Chrome works fine in Ubuntu and Gentoo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe OpenSUSE is your problem .
It is just so out of date and purely constructed .
Chrome works fine in Ubuntu and Gentoo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe OpenSUSE is your problem.
It is just so out of date and purely constructed.
Chrome works fine in Ubuntu and Gentoo.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587320</id>
	<title>Re:Google Chrome linux</title>
	<author>crazycheetah</author>
	<datestamp>1262084760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a few gripes on this article about Chrome on Linux that I don't agree with or care about. For RSS, for example, I can't say I care about it. On my mobile phone (though I have the droid, and I have to say, the only time RSS tempts me is when I'm not on wifi with it...) or maybe a plasma widget (KDE4) on my desktop, RSS is great. But in a browser, or where a browser is easy enough to access just as easy as anything RSS, I don't care. I like going to the website and seeing it that way, and otherwise haven't found much use for RSS. But that is personal preference, so I guess Google needs to get on that for some people.</p><p>As for Flash... I've been using it since you had to have the --enable-plugins flag when you ran Chrome. Back then, it was buggy in some circumstances. Now, I haven't had a problem in as long as I can remember not having to use that flag and a little before that.</p><p>Plus extensions work well now. Only problem there, is that some of them are shoot and miss at times. Some work great, some need a little work. That's typical of any application with extensions/plugins for me, though.</p><p>Complex scripts and KDE are two more things I don't care, so I leave it to others to know if Google needs work there. I run KDE, but I deal with GTK apps enough, I'm familiar with the GTK interface. It bothers me to some degree (I hate some of GTK's dialogs compared to Qt/KDE's, as personal preference), but Google's far from the only one that would need to work on that, if I was to gripe about that. Complex scripts on the other hand, I just don't deal with, so I refrain saying anything.</p><p>I'm using Chrome on Linux to type this, though. I've pretty much fallen to only using it, except when I can't. Some websites don't recognize it (Yahoo mail, I'm looking at you; coupled with finding out I have to go through their ridiculous--well, actually, pretty good for what it is--mobile site on my droid, instead of using a more uniform interface for the OS--I have to pay for POP access?! &gt;.&lt; I used to use POP on my WinMo Treo with them, too--has led me to tell everyone using my Yahoo mail to switch to a gmail that I can just filter specific tags on to), and so you either can't access it all, or have to use some light version of the site that just doesn't make sense--this is Chrome; I should be able to use the damn javascript heavy page just fine! As such, I still have Firefox installed for now like 1 site that I use for work, which only lets IE and Firefox use it for some retarded reason (that's the only options it actually says, anyway). My view of it remains, however, that Chrome is a great browser on Linux. I'm not a fan of Firefox, to be honest, and Chrome suits my needs and wishes for a browser wonderfully.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a few gripes on this article about Chrome on Linux that I do n't agree with or care about .
For RSS , for example , I ca n't say I care about it .
On my mobile phone ( though I have the droid , and I have to say , the only time RSS tempts me is when I 'm not on wifi with it... ) or maybe a plasma widget ( KDE4 ) on my desktop , RSS is great .
But in a browser , or where a browser is easy enough to access just as easy as anything RSS , I do n't care .
I like going to the website and seeing it that way , and otherwise have n't found much use for RSS .
But that is personal preference , so I guess Google needs to get on that for some people.As for Flash... I 've been using it since you had to have the --enable-plugins flag when you ran Chrome .
Back then , it was buggy in some circumstances .
Now , I have n't had a problem in as long as I can remember not having to use that flag and a little before that.Plus extensions work well now .
Only problem there , is that some of them are shoot and miss at times .
Some work great , some need a little work .
That 's typical of any application with extensions/plugins for me , though.Complex scripts and KDE are two more things I do n't care , so I leave it to others to know if Google needs work there .
I run KDE , but I deal with GTK apps enough , I 'm familiar with the GTK interface .
It bothers me to some degree ( I hate some of GTK 's dialogs compared to Qt/KDE 's , as personal preference ) , but Google 's far from the only one that would need to work on that , if I was to gripe about that .
Complex scripts on the other hand , I just do n't deal with , so I refrain saying anything.I 'm using Chrome on Linux to type this , though .
I 've pretty much fallen to only using it , except when I ca n't .
Some websites do n't recognize it ( Yahoo mail , I 'm looking at you ; coupled with finding out I have to go through their ridiculous--well , actually , pretty good for what it is--mobile site on my droid , instead of using a more uniform interface for the OS--I have to pay for POP access ? !
&gt; .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a few gripes on this article about Chrome on Linux that I don't agree with or care about.
For RSS, for example, I can't say I care about it.
On my mobile phone (though I have the droid, and I have to say, the only time RSS tempts me is when I'm not on wifi with it...) or maybe a plasma widget (KDE4) on my desktop, RSS is great.
But in a browser, or where a browser is easy enough to access just as easy as anything RSS, I don't care.
I like going to the website and seeing it that way, and otherwise haven't found much use for RSS.
But that is personal preference, so I guess Google needs to get on that for some people.As for Flash... I've been using it since you had to have the --enable-plugins flag when you ran Chrome.
Back then, it was buggy in some circumstances.
Now, I haven't had a problem in as long as I can remember not having to use that flag and a little before that.Plus extensions work well now.
Only problem there, is that some of them are shoot and miss at times.
Some work great, some need a little work.
That's typical of any application with extensions/plugins for me, though.Complex scripts and KDE are two more things I don't care, so I leave it to others to know if Google needs work there.
I run KDE, but I deal with GTK apps enough, I'm familiar with the GTK interface.
It bothers me to some degree (I hate some of GTK's dialogs compared to Qt/KDE's, as personal preference), but Google's far from the only one that would need to work on that, if I was to gripe about that.
Complex scripts on the other hand, I just don't deal with, so I refrain saying anything.I'm using Chrome on Linux to type this, though.
I've pretty much fallen to only using it, except when I can't.
Some websites don't recognize it (Yahoo mail, I'm looking at you; coupled with finding out I have to go through their ridiculous--well, actually, pretty good for what it is--mobile site on my droid, instead of using a more uniform interface for the OS--I have to pay for POP access?!
&gt;.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591830</id>
	<title>Google Chrome on OpenSUSE ..</title>
	<author>viralMeme</author>
	<datestamp>1259840520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Personally, I didn't succeed in using Flash Player on Google Chrome beta 1 (I am using OpenSUSE 11.2)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</p><p>Works OK here on Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Personally , I did n't succeed in using Flash Player on Google Chrome beta 1 ( I am using OpenSUSE 11.2 ) ..Works OK here on Ubuntu 9.10 ( Karmic Koala )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Personally, I didn't succeed in using Flash Player on Google Chrome beta 1 (I am using OpenSUSE 11.2) ..Works OK here on Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586564</id>
	<title>Re:I would have tried it</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1262081340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What are those dependencies, and how are they licensed? Depending on the license, static linking could force them to open source the entire application.</p><p>This was a continuing source of irritation back when I worked on a closed source Linux app. The glibc people do not give a crap about binary-breaking changes. This resulted in us having to create multiple variants of our product to link against different versions of the runtime libs (in order to support older distros), multiplying our testing efforts by a factor of three. We desperately wanted to just link glibc statically, but that's a no-no because it's LGPL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What are those dependencies , and how are they licensed ?
Depending on the license , static linking could force them to open source the entire application.This was a continuing source of irritation back when I worked on a closed source Linux app .
The glibc people do not give a crap about binary-breaking changes .
This resulted in us having to create multiple variants of our product to link against different versions of the runtime libs ( in order to support older distros ) , multiplying our testing efforts by a factor of three .
We desperately wanted to just link glibc statically , but that 's a no-no because it 's LGPL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are those dependencies, and how are they licensed?
Depending on the license, static linking could force them to open source the entire application.This was a continuing source of irritation back when I worked on a closed source Linux app.
The glibc people do not give a crap about binary-breaking changes.
This resulted in us having to create multiple variants of our product to link against different versions of the runtime libs (in order to support older distros), multiplying our testing efforts by a factor of three.
We desperately wanted to just link glibc statically, but that's a no-no because it's LGPL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30592358</id>
	<title>Problems with embedded fonts</title>
	<author>lee1</author>
	<datestamp>1259849100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use Chrome (on linux) as my default browser now. The only serious problem I have with it its <a href="http://lee-phillips.org/google-chromeBadKerning/" title="lee-phillips.org">handling of embedded fonts</a> [lee-phillips.org], but that might be a problem with webkit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Chrome ( on linux ) as my default browser now .
The only serious problem I have with it its handling of embedded fonts [ lee-phillips.org ] , but that might be a problem with webkit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Chrome (on linux) as my default browser now.
The only serious problem I have with it its handling of embedded fonts [lee-phillips.org], but that might be a problem with webkit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504</id>
	<title>Fix how it handles tabs</title>
	<author>diamondsandrain</author>
	<datestamp>1262081040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Until Chrome fixes how it handles tabs I will never use it. I know it sounds like a minor quibble.... but it is practically unusable when you have more than a couple of tabs open. Firefox handles this the correct way by putting arrows at the ends of the tabs and allowing you to scroll across to the remaining tabs. Chrome handles this the wrong way by trying to squeeze all the tabs onto the window at the same time. It doesn't take very long before you get useless tab titles like "A...." and "D..." and you cannot tell which tab is which.

I usually have at least 15 tabs open at any given time. This can swell to 30 or 40 at times. Of course, I gave up on Safari because when I tried it out there was no way to save the tabs so that they opened again when you restarted the browser. Another very simple thing that greatly affects my enjoyment of the browser. Maybe they have fixed that since.... I don't know.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Until Chrome fixes how it handles tabs I will never use it .
I know it sounds like a minor quibble.... but it is practically unusable when you have more than a couple of tabs open .
Firefox handles this the correct way by putting arrows at the ends of the tabs and allowing you to scroll across to the remaining tabs .
Chrome handles this the wrong way by trying to squeeze all the tabs onto the window at the same time .
It does n't take very long before you get useless tab titles like " A.... " and " D... " and you can not tell which tab is which .
I usually have at least 15 tabs open at any given time .
This can swell to 30 or 40 at times .
Of course , I gave up on Safari because when I tried it out there was no way to save the tabs so that they opened again when you restarted the browser .
Another very simple thing that greatly affects my enjoyment of the browser .
Maybe they have fixed that since.... I do n't know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until Chrome fixes how it handles tabs I will never use it.
I know it sounds like a minor quibble.... but it is practically unusable when you have more than a couple of tabs open.
Firefox handles this the correct way by putting arrows at the ends of the tabs and allowing you to scroll across to the remaining tabs.
Chrome handles this the wrong way by trying to squeeze all the tabs onto the window at the same time.
It doesn't take very long before you get useless tab titles like "A...." and "D..." and you cannot tell which tab is which.
I usually have at least 15 tabs open at any given time.
This can swell to 30 or 40 at times.
Of course, I gave up on Safari because when I tried it out there was no way to save the tabs so that they opened again when you restarted the browser.
Another very simple thing that greatly affects my enjoyment of the browser.
Maybe they have fixed that since.... I don't know.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408</id>
	<title>Flash not working</title>
	<author>avandesande</author>
	<datestamp>1262080560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought flash not working is a feature.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought flash not working is a feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought flash not working is a feature.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30599094</id>
	<title>Re:Fix how it handles tabs</title>
	<author>KnownIssues</author>
	<datestamp>1259832660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I usually have at least 15 tabs open at any given time. This can swell to 30 or 40 at times.</p></div><p>Dang, that's a lot of porn!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I usually have at least 15 tabs open at any given time .
This can swell to 30 or 40 at times.Dang , that 's a lot of porn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I usually have at least 15 tabs open at any given time.
This can swell to 30 or 40 at times.Dang, that's a lot of porn!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586530</id>
	<title>oh noes!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262081160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You would think with all the cool shit on Linux it would be better than the Windows version. I'm sure it could have been done in ruby in like 1 hour.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You would think with all the cool shit on Linux it would be better than the Windows version .
I 'm sure it could have been done in ruby in like 1 hour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You would think with all the cool shit on Linux it would be better than the Windows version.
I'm sure it could have been done in ruby in like 1 hour.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586432</id>
	<title>Google Chrome linux</title>
	<author>cavedweller96</author>
	<datestamp>1262080620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personally, I disagree. Flash works flawlessly on chrome. More features can be added later, you have to remember it is a beta. finally, as a person who had compiled Chrome OS, It works great. My only problem with it is lack of wireless card support, but once again BETA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I disagree .
Flash works flawlessly on chrome .
More features can be added later , you have to remember it is a beta .
finally , as a person who had compiled Chrome OS , It works great .
My only problem with it is lack of wireless card support , but once again BETA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I disagree.
Flash works flawlessly on chrome.
More features can be added later, you have to remember it is a beta.
finally, as a person who had compiled Chrome OS, It works great.
My only problem with it is lack of wireless card support, but once again BETA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586666</id>
	<title>Getting Flash to Work</title>
	<author>Kelson</author>
	<datestamp>1262081820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had two systems, both 64-bit Fedora, that I tried Chrome on. On one, Flash worked fine from the moment I installed Chrome. On the other, Chrome didn't even notice the plugin existed. Flash (32-bit, wrapped with mozilla-plugin-config) worked just fine in Firefox on both computers.  When I compared the two systems, it turned out that one was missing a symbolic link. The file is in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins-wrapped, but Chrome was looking in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins.</p><p>Adding a symbolic link solved it.</p><p>More info: <a href="http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2009/12/09/64bit-chrome-flash/" title="hyperborea.org">Getting Flash to work on Google Chrome for 64-bit Linux</a> [hyperborea.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had two systems , both 64-bit Fedora , that I tried Chrome on .
On one , Flash worked fine from the moment I installed Chrome .
On the other , Chrome did n't even notice the plugin existed .
Flash ( 32-bit , wrapped with mozilla-plugin-config ) worked just fine in Firefox on both computers .
When I compared the two systems , it turned out that one was missing a symbolic link .
The file is in /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins-wrapped , but Chrome was looking in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins.Adding a symbolic link solved it.More info : Getting Flash to work on Google Chrome for 64-bit Linux [ hyperborea.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had two systems, both 64-bit Fedora, that I tried Chrome on.
On one, Flash worked fine from the moment I installed Chrome.
On the other, Chrome didn't even notice the plugin existed.
Flash (32-bit, wrapped with mozilla-plugin-config) worked just fine in Firefox on both computers.
When I compared the two systems, it turned out that one was missing a symbolic link.
The file is in /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins-wrapped, but Chrome was looking in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins.Adding a symbolic link solved it.More info: Getting Flash to work on Google Chrome for 64-bit Linux [hyperborea.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586506</id>
	<title>chromium</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262081040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use the chromium builds from the openSUSE:Contriib repository.  It is compiled from source and uses many of the system libraries inistead of statically compiled ones.  It also uses the system browser plugin directory and has no problem using flash.  Also, chromium doesn't contain usage data gathering like chrome does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use the chromium builds from the openSUSE : Contriib repository .
It is compiled from source and uses many of the system libraries inistead of statically compiled ones .
It also uses the system browser plugin directory and has no problem using flash .
Also , chromium does n't contain usage data gathering like chrome does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use the chromium builds from the openSUSE:Contriib repository.
It is compiled from source and uses many of the system libraries inistead of statically compiled ones.
It also uses the system browser plugin directory and has no problem using flash.
Also, chromium doesn't contain usage data gathering like chrome does.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586934</id>
	<title>Re:Long (relatively) user here.</title>
	<author>Thelasko</author>
	<datestamp>1262083260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Same here.  I've been using Chromium daily builds on my Ubuntu 8.04 machine for some time now.  It runs quite well, Flash works, and it even has rudimentary support for adblock plus.<br> <br>
My only complaint is the regressions and bugs in some of the builds, none of whom have effected stability.  However, bugs are to be expected in such a release.<br> <br>
I think the writer of this fine article is simply too picky, and using the wrong version of Chrome in the first place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here .
I 've been using Chromium daily builds on my Ubuntu 8.04 machine for some time now .
It runs quite well , Flash works , and it even has rudimentary support for adblock plus .
My only complaint is the regressions and bugs in some of the builds , none of whom have effected stability .
However , bugs are to be expected in such a release .
I think the writer of this fine article is simply too picky , and using the wrong version of Chrome in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here.
I've been using Chromium daily builds on my Ubuntu 8.04 machine for some time now.
It runs quite well, Flash works, and it even has rudimentary support for adblock plus.
My only complaint is the regressions and bugs in some of the builds, none of whom have effected stability.
However, bugs are to be expected in such a release.
I think the writer of this fine article is simply too picky, and using the wrong version of Chrome in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586642</id>
	<title>chrome on windows first</title>
	<author>poached</author>
	<datestamp>1262081700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chrome has it's share of issues on Windows too.</p><p>Using Chrome dev 4.0+, slashdot scrolls very slowly when browsing with the weird slider bar at top (as guest).  No problem in FF.</p><p>I also experienced several crashes, and it sorely needs a bookmark tree or side panel.</p><p>A lot of the extensions didn't work as advertised.</p><p>It's definitely a work in progress like it warned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chrome has it 's share of issues on Windows too.Using Chrome dev 4.0 + , slashdot scrolls very slowly when browsing with the weird slider bar at top ( as guest ) .
No problem in FF.I also experienced several crashes , and it sorely needs a bookmark tree or side panel.A lot of the extensions did n't work as advertised.It 's definitely a work in progress like it warned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chrome has it's share of issues on Windows too.Using Chrome dev 4.0+, slashdot scrolls very slowly when browsing with the weird slider bar at top (as guest).
No problem in FF.I also experienced several crashes, and it sorely needs a bookmark tree or side panel.A lot of the extensions didn't work as advertised.It's definitely a work in progress like it warned.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586946</id>
	<title>Re:Long (relatively) user here.</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1262083320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, interestingly enough, I've seen that behavior before on Slashdot, just never thought to narrow it down to a number of pixels before.</p><p>This is in Firefox (on Windows XP) but it's EXACTLY the same problem.</p><p>Odd, that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , interestingly enough , I 've seen that behavior before on Slashdot , just never thought to narrow it down to a number of pixels before.This is in Firefox ( on Windows XP ) but it 's EXACTLY the same problem.Odd , that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, interestingly enough, I've seen that behavior before on Slashdot, just never thought to narrow it down to a number of pixels before.This is in Firefox (on Windows XP) but it's EXACTLY the same problem.Odd, that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586872</id>
	<title>wonder how the quality</title>
	<author>Threni</author>
	<datestamp>1262082900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; I wonder how the quality of Google Chrome OS will be, especially if it's based on Linux and Google Chrome."</p><p>I don't wonder. It won't be based on any Linux - it'll be based on THE linux build which everything will have been developed for and tested against.  How it works on $LINUX\_DISTRO\_193823 is neither here nor there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I wonder how the quality of Google Chrome OS will be , especially if it 's based on Linux and Google Chrome .
" I do n't wonder .
It wo n't be based on any Linux - it 'll be based on THE linux build which everything will have been developed for and tested against .
How it works on $ LINUX \ _DISTRO \ _193823 is neither here nor there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I wonder how the quality of Google Chrome OS will be, especially if it's based on Linux and Google Chrome.
"I don't wonder.
It won't be based on any Linux - it'll be based on THE linux build which everything will have been developed for and tested against.
How it works on $LINUX\_DISTRO\_193823 is neither here nor there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586578</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262081400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So not being able to view video on sites like YouTube seamlessly (ie. without requiring extensions/workarounds to view FLV files in a 3rd-party player) is a feature?</p><p>And do give me that shit about YouTube not having anything useful to watch. If so, you just aren't trying very hard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So not being able to view video on sites like YouTube seamlessly ( ie .
without requiring extensions/workarounds to view FLV files in a 3rd-party player ) is a feature ? And do give me that shit about YouTube not having anything useful to watch .
If so , you just are n't trying very hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So not being able to view video on sites like YouTube seamlessly (ie.
without requiring extensions/workarounds to view FLV files in a 3rd-party player) is a feature?And do give me that shit about YouTube not having anything useful to watch.
If so, you just aren't trying very hard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587558</id>
	<title>Re:Long (relatively) user here.</title>
	<author>crazycheetah</author>
	<datestamp>1262085540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow. I've noticed the 600 pixels things a few times. It's hit me on slashdot--always seems to be the bottom right of it this text box in certain circumstances, specifically. It never bothered me enough to actually even check if anyone else had the problem. Plus with how many weird things I've been seeing KDE doing lately (parts are getting better and other parts worse... some of them are just weird bugs, like my background always being blank when I first get into KDE besides knowing what I set it as--easy enough, just go into Desktop properties and hit Ok, and that's fixed), I never fully counted that against Chrome, though it seemed most likely. That there is my biggest complaint about Chrome (and it doesn't even bother me that much...).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
I 've noticed the 600 pixels things a few times .
It 's hit me on slashdot--always seems to be the bottom right of it this text box in certain circumstances , specifically .
It never bothered me enough to actually even check if anyone else had the problem .
Plus with how many weird things I 've been seeing KDE doing lately ( parts are getting better and other parts worse... some of them are just weird bugs , like my background always being blank when I first get into KDE besides knowing what I set it as--easy enough , just go into Desktop properties and hit Ok , and that 's fixed ) , I never fully counted that against Chrome , though it seemed most likely .
That there is my biggest complaint about Chrome ( and it does n't even bother me that much... ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
I've noticed the 600 pixels things a few times.
It's hit me on slashdot--always seems to be the bottom right of it this text box in certain circumstances, specifically.
It never bothered me enough to actually even check if anyone else had the problem.
Plus with how many weird things I've been seeing KDE doing lately (parts are getting better and other parts worse... some of them are just weird bugs, like my background always being blank when I first get into KDE besides knowing what I set it as--easy enough, just go into Desktop properties and hit Ok, and that's fixed), I never fully counted that against Chrome, though it seemed most likely.
That there is my biggest complaint about Chrome (and it doesn't even bother me that much...).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30599840</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1259836320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>YouTube's quality is crap (even with H.264), the interface is crap, the comments are crap, the recommendations are crap, the URL scheme is crap... Do I need to continue?</p></div><p>If someone sends me a link to YouTube, what relevance do any of these issues have to me?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>YouTube 's quality is crap ( even with H.264 ) , the interface is crap , the comments are crap , the recommendations are crap , the URL scheme is crap... Do I need to continue ? If someone sends me a link to YouTube , what relevance do any of these issues have to me ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>YouTube's quality is crap (even with H.264), the interface is crap, the comments are crap, the recommendations are crap, the URL scheme is crap... Do I need to continue?If someone sends me a link to YouTube, what relevance do any of these issues have to me?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586894</id>
	<title>Re:Not Chrome's Fault</title>
	<author>lytles</author>
	<datestamp>1262083020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Linux is <b>the</b> shit.</p></div><p>there - fixed that for you. google chrome runs great on ubuntu 9.04 - quick startup, fast page rendering, fast switching between tabs, and flash works fine. i've had a page crash, but never lost the full browser - usually have 5-20 tabs open. chrome's "developer tools" are good - firebug is better for many things, but the developer tools are much less intrusive, don't slow down page loads nearly as much. the two tools compliment each other well
<br>
<br>
in short, chrome is a big improvement for me<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux is the shit.there - fixed that for you .
google chrome runs great on ubuntu 9.04 - quick startup , fast page rendering , fast switching between tabs , and flash works fine .
i 've had a page crash , but never lost the full browser - usually have 5-20 tabs open .
chrome 's " developer tools " are good - firebug is better for many things , but the developer tools are much less intrusive , do n't slow down page loads nearly as much .
the two tools compliment each other well in short , chrome is a big improvement for me .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux is the shit.there - fixed that for you.
google chrome runs great on ubuntu 9.04 - quick startup, fast page rendering, fast switching between tabs, and flash works fine.
i've had a page crash, but never lost the full browser - usually have 5-20 tabs open.
chrome's "developer tools" are good - firebug is better for many things, but the developer tools are much less intrusive, don't slow down page loads nearly as much.
the two tools compliment each other well


in short, chrome is a big improvement for me ...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589234</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262094540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So not being able to view video on sites like YouTube seamlessly (ie. without requiring extensions/workarounds to view FLV files in a 3rd-party player) is a feature?</i></p><p><i>And do give me that shit about YouTube not having anything useful to watch. If so, you just aren't trying very hard.</i> </p><p>I have a queue of shit to watch at home so I'm not trying hard to add to it.  That said, the fact that Chrome and YouTube are both Google products, I think the likelihood of YouTube working on a Google-branded Chrome device to be high.</p><p>This is a point of absuridity in commenting on these speculative stories, I believe you have reached it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So not being able to view video on sites like YouTube seamlessly ( ie .
without requiring extensions/workarounds to view FLV files in a 3rd-party player ) is a feature ? And do give me that shit about YouTube not having anything useful to watch .
If so , you just are n't trying very hard .
I have a queue of shit to watch at home so I 'm not trying hard to add to it .
That said , the fact that Chrome and YouTube are both Google products , I think the likelihood of YouTube working on a Google-branded Chrome device to be high.This is a point of absuridity in commenting on these speculative stories , I believe you have reached it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So not being able to view video on sites like YouTube seamlessly (ie.
without requiring extensions/workarounds to view FLV files in a 3rd-party player) is a feature?And do give me that shit about YouTube not having anything useful to watch.
If so, you just aren't trying very hard.
I have a queue of shit to watch at home so I'm not trying hard to add to it.
That said, the fact that Chrome and YouTube are both Google products, I think the likelihood of YouTube working on a Google-branded Chrome device to be high.This is a point of absuridity in commenting on these speculative stories, I believe you have reached it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30599034</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>KnownIssues</author>
	<datestamp>1259832360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.~ C.S. Lewis</p></div><p>Did anyone else read that as "trannies" the first time they read it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of all tyrannies , a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. ~ C.S .
LewisDid anyone else read that as " trannies " the first time they read it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.~ C.S.
LewisDid anyone else read that as "trannies" the first time they read it?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586884</id>
	<title>Fedora 11 and Flash works here...</title>
	<author>Rick Richardson</author>
	<datestamp>1262083020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fedora 11 and Adobe Flash works here...</p><p>However, disabling IPV6 is not possible (unlike Firefox).  So every access I wait for IPV6 DNS to timeout.  It is really slow compared to Firefox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fedora 11 and Adobe Flash works here...However , disabling IPV6 is not possible ( unlike Firefox ) .
So every access I wait for IPV6 DNS to timeout .
It is really slow compared to Firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fedora 11 and Adobe Flash works here...However, disabling IPV6 is not possible (unlike Firefox).
So every access I wait for IPV6 DNS to timeout.
It is really slow compared to Firefox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588450</id>
	<title>Re:It's a beta?</title>
	<author>fr4nk</author>
	<datestamp>1262089500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's probably the same as with GMail and other Google services: they stay in beta for years so Google doesn't have to officially support them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's probably the same as with GMail and other Google services : they stay in beta for years so Google does n't have to officially support them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's probably the same as with GMail and other Google services: they stay in beta for years so Google doesn't have to officially support them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586906</id>
	<title>OpenSUSE is NOT Linux</title>
	<author>viraltus</author>
	<datestamp>1262083140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Ubuntu works great for example and the incompatibility with KDE is kinda a good thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Ubuntu works great for example and the incompatibility with KDE is kinda a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Ubuntu works great for example and the incompatibility with KDE is kinda a good thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586430</id>
	<title>Not Chrome's Fault</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262080620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux is shit.</p><p>That's why every Linux application available looks like shit.</p><p>You didn't think that was a coincidence, did you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux is shit.That 's why every Linux application available looks like shit.You did n't think that was a coincidence , did you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux is shit.That's why every Linux application available looks like shit.You didn't think that was a coincidence, did you?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588732</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>xeoron</author>
	<datestamp>1262090940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I prefer to have flashblock plugin to manage that. There is now a Chrome plugin version of it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer to have flashblock plugin to manage that .
There is now a Chrome plugin version of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer to have flashblock plugin to manage that.
There is now a Chrome plugin version of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30603576</id>
	<title>It seems you might dig dipper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262290860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have installed beta version of chrome on OpenSUSE 11.2 and using chrome without any issue both build is x64 and working fine.</p><p>In terms of speed improvement, it is far more better than other browser on linux. Also i add Opera to second number in terms of speed.</p><p>just to add one more note for extension, it is coming and already see more than 15 pages of extension list.<br>there is ad blocker in extension.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have installed beta version of chrome on OpenSUSE 11.2 and using chrome without any issue both build is x64 and working fine.In terms of speed improvement , it is far more better than other browser on linux .
Also i add Opera to second number in terms of speed.just to add one more note for extension , it is coming and already see more than 15 pages of extension list.there is ad blocker in extension .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have installed beta version of chrome on OpenSUSE 11.2 and using chrome without any issue both build is x64 and working fine.In terms of speed improvement, it is far more better than other browser on linux.
Also i add Opera to second number in terms of speed.just to add one more note for extension, it is coming and already see more than 15 pages of extension list.there is ad blocker in extension.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591344</id>
	<title>Insufficient cookie management and I want NoScript</title>
	<author>jthill</author>
	<datestamp>1259831760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The cookie management is completely primitive.  I don't want much - I tell FF to force everything to session cookies with a whitelist for perma-cookies and a blacklist for scum like 2o7.  Chrome won't do any of that.  Kiss your privacy goodbye.
</p><p>And I want NoScript or something reasonably like that.
</p><p>The rest of it just rocks &mdash; I really really want to use this browser &mdash; but those two are showstoppers.  I don't like handing over control of my browser to just anybody.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The cookie management is completely primitive .
I do n't want much - I tell FF to force everything to session cookies with a whitelist for perma-cookies and a blacklist for scum like 2o7 .
Chrome wo n't do any of that .
Kiss your privacy goodbye .
And I want NoScript or something reasonably like that .
The rest of it just rocks    I really really want to use this browser    but those two are showstoppers .
I do n't like handing over control of my browser to just anybody .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The cookie management is completely primitive.
I don't want much - I tell FF to force everything to session cookies with a whitelist for perma-cookies and a blacklist for scum like 2o7.
Chrome won't do any of that.
Kiss your privacy goodbye.
And I want NoScript or something reasonably like that.
The rest of it just rocks — I really really want to use this browser — but those two are showstoppers.
I don't like handing over control of my browser to just anybody.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588634</id>
	<title>Re:Long (relatively) user here.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262090400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Technically, Hebrew and Arabic are not complex scripts, they are right-to-left scripts. While right-to-left scripts are a lot more work to get right than simple scripts like Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic, they are a lot easier to get right than the true complex scripts. Complex scripts are used for many languages of South Asia and Southeast Asia:</p><ul><li> Burmese</li><li> Devanagari</li><li> Gujarati</li><li> Kannada</li><li> Khmer</li><li> Malayalam</li><li> Oriya</li><li> Sinhala</li><li> Tamil</li><li> Telugu</li><li> Tibetan</li></ul><p>It doesn't matter to most people but it's one of my reasons for giving up on Linux as a desktop several times and going back to Windows which I otherwise hate. Windows does have the best support for the largest range of languages and writing systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Technically , Hebrew and Arabic are not complex scripts , they are right-to-left scripts .
While right-to-left scripts are a lot more work to get right than simple scripts like Latin , Greek , and Cyrillic , they are a lot easier to get right than the true complex scripts .
Complex scripts are used for many languages of South Asia and Southeast Asia : Burmese Devanagari Gujarati Kannada Khmer Malayalam Oriya Sinhala Tamil Telugu TibetanIt does n't matter to most people but it 's one of my reasons for giving up on Linux as a desktop several times and going back to Windows which I otherwise hate .
Windows does have the best support for the largest range of languages and writing systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technically, Hebrew and Arabic are not complex scripts, they are right-to-left scripts.
While right-to-left scripts are a lot more work to get right than simple scripts like Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic, they are a lot easier to get right than the true complex scripts.
Complex scripts are used for many languages of South Asia and Southeast Asia: Burmese Devanagari Gujarati Kannada Khmer Malayalam Oriya Sinhala Tamil Telugu TibetanIt doesn't matter to most people but it's one of my reasons for giving up on Linux as a desktop several times and going back to Windows which I otherwise hate.
Windows does have the best support for the largest range of languages and writing systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586748</id>
	<title>sticky font size and bookmarks</title>
	<author>hogleg</author>
	<datestamp>1262082180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>its working pretty good for me on ubuntu 9.10. I would like to see it remember the font size of the page next time it opened, like it does in firefox. As it is now, upon opening the page will default to whatever the default is.

I miss the ability to do keywords to my bookmarks too.

I would think this would be easy to fix. Chrome can only get better as it goes forward.</htmltext>
<tokenext>its working pretty good for me on ubuntu 9.10 .
I would like to see it remember the font size of the page next time it opened , like it does in firefox .
As it is now , upon opening the page will default to whatever the default is .
I miss the ability to do keywords to my bookmarks too .
I would think this would be easy to fix .
Chrome can only get better as it goes forward .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its working pretty good for me on ubuntu 9.10.
I would like to see it remember the font size of the page next time it opened, like it does in firefox.
As it is now, upon opening the page will default to whatever the default is.
I miss the ability to do keywords to my bookmarks too.
I would think this would be easy to fix.
Chrome can only get better as it goes forward.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586870</id>
	<title>Re:Fix how it handles tabs</title>
	<author>AngelofDeath-02</author>
	<datestamp>1262082900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I never understood why one would want to have the tabs save when you close the browser. Perhaps someone could enlighten me? maybe provide a few cases where this might actually be useful?</p><p>Having a bunch of tabs when you start up the browser usually means things take longer to load, which slows me down when I only want to browse one page. Additionally when closing a browser, I close it because I'm done with whatever's in it. I think the main difference is usage. I use firefox windows as a sort of divider in addition to tabs. If I search for one thing, I'll have a FF window open and it'll contain all the tabs related to this, and another window with whatever else I'm doing. it seems like you don't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I never understood why one would want to have the tabs save when you close the browser .
Perhaps someone could enlighten me ?
maybe provide a few cases where this might actually be useful ? Having a bunch of tabs when you start up the browser usually means things take longer to load , which slows me down when I only want to browse one page .
Additionally when closing a browser , I close it because I 'm done with whatever 's in it .
I think the main difference is usage .
I use firefox windows as a sort of divider in addition to tabs .
If I search for one thing , I 'll have a FF window open and it 'll contain all the tabs related to this , and another window with whatever else I 'm doing .
it seems like you do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never understood why one would want to have the tabs save when you close the browser.
Perhaps someone could enlighten me?
maybe provide a few cases where this might actually be useful?Having a bunch of tabs when you start up the browser usually means things take longer to load, which slows me down when I only want to browse one page.
Additionally when closing a browser, I close it because I'm done with whatever's in it.
I think the main difference is usage.
I use firefox windows as a sort of divider in addition to tabs.
If I search for one thing, I'll have a FF window open and it'll contain all the tabs related to this, and another window with whatever else I'm doing.
it seems like you don't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30602910</id>
	<title>Who cares.</title>
	<author>rantingkitten</author>
	<datestamp>1259862180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does it still have that godawful "awesome bar" which, through some supernatural force, manages to be even worse than Firefox's?  Does it still think it knows better than me why I opened a new tab?  Does it still look ugly as sin?  Does it still silently install stupid google updaters alongside without asking or telling me?  <br>
<br>
Nothing it can ever do, in my mind, will make up for these atrocities.  Ditch the "awesome bar", give me a BLANK SCREEN when I open a new tab, integrate well with my current DE, don't install anything alongside, and I'll consider trying it again.  Until then, Chrome is a complete disaster in my eyes. <br>
<br>
Of course, using a browser from a company that has a profit motive for keeping track of where I'm going and what I'm doing seems like a bloody stupid idea to begin with.  <br>
<br>
You know, nevermind.  Even if they get rid of all that crap, I will never use Chrome.  They had their chance to make a good first impression and failed, and I've come to loathe every product Google has ever produced past their actual search engine and perhaps their news aggregator.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it still have that godawful " awesome bar " which , through some supernatural force , manages to be even worse than Firefox 's ?
Does it still think it knows better than me why I opened a new tab ?
Does it still look ugly as sin ?
Does it still silently install stupid google updaters alongside without asking or telling me ?
Nothing it can ever do , in my mind , will make up for these atrocities .
Ditch the " awesome bar " , give me a BLANK SCREEN when I open a new tab , integrate well with my current DE , do n't install anything alongside , and I 'll consider trying it again .
Until then , Chrome is a complete disaster in my eyes .
Of course , using a browser from a company that has a profit motive for keeping track of where I 'm going and what I 'm doing seems like a bloody stupid idea to begin with .
You know , nevermind .
Even if they get rid of all that crap , I will never use Chrome .
They had their chance to make a good first impression and failed , and I 've come to loathe every product Google has ever produced past their actual search engine and perhaps their news aggregator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it still have that godawful "awesome bar" which, through some supernatural force, manages to be even worse than Firefox's?
Does it still think it knows better than me why I opened a new tab?
Does it still look ugly as sin?
Does it still silently install stupid google updaters alongside without asking or telling me?
Nothing it can ever do, in my mind, will make up for these atrocities.
Ditch the "awesome bar", give me a BLANK SCREEN when I open a new tab, integrate well with my current DE, don't install anything alongside, and I'll consider trying it again.
Until then, Chrome is a complete disaster in my eyes.
Of course, using a browser from a company that has a profit motive for keeping track of where I'm going and what I'm doing seems like a bloody stupid idea to begin with.
You know, nevermind.
Even if they get rid of all that crap, I will never use Chrome.
They had their chance to make a good first impression and failed, and I've come to loathe every product Google has ever produced past their actual search engine and perhaps their news aggregator.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591474</id>
	<title>Aw snap! no good ad block</title>
	<author>pmontra</author>
	<datestamp>1259833680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sometimes my Chromium 4 on Linux breaks on some pages with the Aw snap! error but this is not very important.
What's more important is that the ad blockers for Chrome are still very primitive compared to adblock+ for firefox. The GUI for selecting the ads to block is a pain to use and I quickly gave up using it. I'm using Firefox as my primary browser and Chromium for compatibility tests and this won't change until Chromium extensions gets on par in terms of usability (mainly adblock, firebug, noscript)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes my Chromium 4 on Linux breaks on some pages with the Aw snap !
error but this is not very important .
What 's more important is that the ad blockers for Chrome are still very primitive compared to adblock + for firefox .
The GUI for selecting the ads to block is a pain to use and I quickly gave up using it .
I 'm using Firefox as my primary browser and Chromium for compatibility tests and this wo n't change until Chromium extensions gets on par in terms of usability ( mainly adblock , firebug , noscript )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes my Chromium 4 on Linux breaks on some pages with the Aw snap!
error but this is not very important.
What's more important is that the ad blockers for Chrome are still very primitive compared to adblock+ for firefox.
The GUI for selecting the ads to block is a pain to use and I quickly gave up using it.
I'm using Firefox as my primary browser and Chromium for compatibility tests and this won't change until Chromium extensions gets on par in terms of usability (mainly adblock, firebug, noscript)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587084</id>
	<title>Re:RSS in Chrome</title>
	<author>eqisow</author>
	<datestamp>1262083980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps I'm odd, but while I like my RSS reader, I prefer some things as live bookmarks.

For example, Slashdot, xkcd, and other such sites where I at least look at most entries are in Akregator. However, I keep a few torrent feeds as well as an RSS for BIOS updates as live bookmarks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps I 'm odd , but while I like my RSS reader , I prefer some things as live bookmarks .
For example , Slashdot , xkcd , and other such sites where I at least look at most entries are in Akregator .
However , I keep a few torrent feeds as well as an RSS for BIOS updates as live bookmarks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps I'm odd, but while I like my RSS reader, I prefer some things as live bookmarks.
For example, Slashdot, xkcd, and other such sites where I at least look at most entries are in Akregator.
However, I keep a few torrent feeds as well as an RSS for BIOS updates as live bookmarks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586810</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>Inda</author>
	<datestamp>1262082540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought the same, after finally installing Chrome on Vista, after the billboard adverts finally got to me.<br><br>The UI was blistering fast on Chrome and I thought WOW. After 10 minutes of use, I was not happy with the UI bugs (when zoomed, some links on some sites don't work), and the lack of UI customisation options.<br><br>FF3 is still a more finished product.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the same , after finally installing Chrome on Vista , after the billboard adverts finally got to me.The UI was blistering fast on Chrome and I thought WOW .
After 10 minutes of use , I was not happy with the UI bugs ( when zoomed , some links on some sites do n't work ) , and the lack of UI customisation options.FF3 is still a more finished product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the same, after finally installing Chrome on Vista, after the billboard adverts finally got to me.The UI was blistering fast on Chrome and I thought WOW.
After 10 minutes of use, I was not happy with the UI bugs (when zoomed, some links on some sites don't work), and the lack of UI customisation options.FF3 is still a more finished product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586478</id>
	<title>Flash works fine...</title>
	<author>baldbobbo</author>
	<datestamp>1262080800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>on Ubuntu using GNOME. I've been using Chrome since Alpha, and once they had flash compatibility, I haven't used anything else. Super fast, occasionally crashes, but when it does, it's flash loading, and the browser doesn't shut down on you.

Didn't RTFA, but he should have tried different distros. To say "It sucks on Linux" when you only use one distro is like saying "Ice cream sucks" when you only taste one flavor. You gotta try em all</htmltext>
<tokenext>on Ubuntu using GNOME .
I 've been using Chrome since Alpha , and once they had flash compatibility , I have n't used anything else .
Super fast , occasionally crashes , but when it does , it 's flash loading , and the browser does n't shut down on you .
Did n't RTFA , but he should have tried different distros .
To say " It sucks on Linux " when you only use one distro is like saying " Ice cream sucks " when you only taste one flavor .
You got ta try em all</tokentext>
<sentencetext>on Ubuntu using GNOME.
I've been using Chrome since Alpha, and once they had flash compatibility, I haven't used anything else.
Super fast, occasionally crashes, but when it does, it's flash loading, and the browser doesn't shut down on you.
Didn't RTFA, but he should have tried different distros.
To say "It sucks on Linux" when you only use one distro is like saying "Ice cream sucks" when you only taste one flavor.
You gotta try em all</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30598906</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>Zephiris</author>
	<datestamp>1259831820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SeaMonkey (2.0) is based on the same components as Firefox (3.5), but the UI response is normal because it's extended from the original Mozilla Suite. Firefox, since its inception, has had single-thread, single-engine-for-entire-browser JS engine, which the UI (written in XUL) also uses. That typically leads to crap response, hanging if something doesn't expect that to happen.</p><p>SeaMonkey doesn't have that limitation. It doesn't have a 'faster JS engine' than FF (though Opera's is much slower), but responds much snappier, never 'hangs' if you have some JS taking up a lot of CPU time. It also generally uses less memory per-tab than FF, sadly enough, while being compatible with the most popular extensions (and there being extensions on addons.mozilla.com and xsidebar site making it act just like FF).</p><p>As perhaps the one caveat, though, certain Microsoft software (virtualearth/bing maps) refuse to recognize it or that it can handle SVG, throws a silent exception for which  it -silently- mangles certain sites that use its service for mapping basic addresses and forms (cough, Pizza Hut, cough).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SeaMonkey ( 2.0 ) is based on the same components as Firefox ( 3.5 ) , but the UI response is normal because it 's extended from the original Mozilla Suite .
Firefox , since its inception , has had single-thread , single-engine-for-entire-browser JS engine , which the UI ( written in XUL ) also uses .
That typically leads to crap response , hanging if something does n't expect that to happen.SeaMonkey does n't have that limitation .
It does n't have a 'faster JS engine ' than FF ( though Opera 's is much slower ) , but responds much snappier , never 'hangs ' if you have some JS taking up a lot of CPU time .
It also generally uses less memory per-tab than FF , sadly enough , while being compatible with the most popular extensions ( and there being extensions on addons.mozilla.com and xsidebar site making it act just like FF ) .As perhaps the one caveat , though , certain Microsoft software ( virtualearth/bing maps ) refuse to recognize it or that it can handle SVG , throws a silent exception for which it -silently- mangles certain sites that use its service for mapping basic addresses and forms ( cough , Pizza Hut , cough ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SeaMonkey (2.0) is based on the same components as Firefox (3.5), but the UI response is normal because it's extended from the original Mozilla Suite.
Firefox, since its inception, has had single-thread, single-engine-for-entire-browser JS engine, which the UI (written in XUL) also uses.
That typically leads to crap response, hanging if something doesn't expect that to happen.SeaMonkey doesn't have that limitation.
It doesn't have a 'faster JS engine' than FF (though Opera's is much slower), but responds much snappier, never 'hangs' if you have some JS taking up a lot of CPU time.
It also generally uses less memory per-tab than FF, sadly enough, while being compatible with the most popular extensions (and there being extensions on addons.mozilla.com and xsidebar site making it act just like FF).As perhaps the one caveat, though, certain Microsoft software (virtualearth/bing maps) refuse to recognize it or that it can handle SVG, throws a silent exception for which  it -silently- mangles certain sites that use its service for mapping basic addresses and forms (cough, Pizza Hut, cough).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588472</id>
	<title>Doesn't play nice with some window managers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262089560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I found the experience to be pretty similar to Chrome on Windows, which is pretty good, but there's one annoying bug keeping me from using Chrome.  In true fashion of the readers here, I will use this time on Slashdot to complain about it while simultaneously not bothering to investigate if it's a known bug or if it's now fixed.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>I was a bit frustrated that, at least with WindowMaker, Chrome both presents its own window decorations, <i>and</i> leaves it having a title bar from the Window Manager.  Then, for some windows, like Preferences, it does not draw its own decorations.  WindowMaker can let me set whether or not to draw decorations, but every Chrome window has the same name string, so WindowMaker is unable to dintinguish between the windows which Chrome draws decorations for and the windows for which it needs to have the WM do this.  I can get WM decorations in all windows or none, but not on a per-window-type basis.</p><p>I'd look into seeing if others have hit this, or look into the source and go about fixing this myself, but thus far I've been busy with other things...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I found the experience to be pretty similar to Chrome on Windows , which is pretty good , but there 's one annoying bug keeping me from using Chrome .
In true fashion of the readers here , I will use this time on Slashdot to complain about it while simultaneously not bothering to investigate if it 's a known bug or if it 's now fixed .
: - ) I was a bit frustrated that , at least with WindowMaker , Chrome both presents its own window decorations , and leaves it having a title bar from the Window Manager .
Then , for some windows , like Preferences , it does not draw its own decorations .
WindowMaker can let me set whether or not to draw decorations , but every Chrome window has the same name string , so WindowMaker is unable to dintinguish between the windows which Chrome draws decorations for and the windows for which it needs to have the WM do this .
I can get WM decorations in all windows or none , but not on a per-window-type basis.I 'd look into seeing if others have hit this , or look into the source and go about fixing this myself , but thus far I 've been busy with other things.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I found the experience to be pretty similar to Chrome on Windows, which is pretty good, but there's one annoying bug keeping me from using Chrome.
In true fashion of the readers here, I will use this time on Slashdot to complain about it while simultaneously not bothering to investigate if it's a known bug or if it's now fixed.
:-)I was a bit frustrated that, at least with WindowMaker, Chrome both presents its own window decorations, and leaves it having a title bar from the Window Manager.
Then, for some windows, like Preferences, it does not draw its own decorations.
WindowMaker can let me set whether or not to draw decorations, but every Chrome window has the same name string, so WindowMaker is unable to dintinguish between the windows which Chrome draws decorations for and the windows for which it needs to have the WM do this.
I can get WM decorations in all windows or none, but not on a per-window-type basis.I'd look into seeing if others have hit this, or look into the source and go about fixing this myself, but thus far I've been busy with other things...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591328</id>
	<title>Chromium rocks!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259831040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't even read the review, but from the sounds of it, it sounds completely oppositie from my experience. I've been using chromium for a while now and it works flawlessly. Haven't had one crash or issue, and flash works fine, and it is significantly faster than firefox. My only complaint is that if you load an xml document it doesn't display it nicely like firefox does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't even read the review , but from the sounds of it , it sounds completely oppositie from my experience .
I 've been using chromium for a while now and it works flawlessly .
Have n't had one crash or issue , and flash works fine , and it is significantly faster than firefox .
My only complaint is that if you load an xml document it does n't display it nicely like firefox does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't even read the review, but from the sounds of it, it sounds completely oppositie from my experience.
I've been using chromium for a while now and it works flawlessly.
Haven't had one crash or issue, and flash works fine, and it is significantly faster than firefox.
My only complaint is that if you load an xml document it doesn't display it nicely like firefox does.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589158</id>
	<title>No x64 Chrome plugin for Gears</title>
	<author>omkhar</author>
	<datestamp>1262093820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm running F12 x64 and I downloaded the Chrome beta. Why hasn't anyone pointed out that the lack of an x64 Gears plugin is rather silly?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm running F12 x64 and I downloaded the Chrome beta .
Why has n't anyone pointed out that the lack of an x64 Gears plugin is rather silly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm running F12 x64 and I downloaded the Chrome beta.
Why hasn't anyone pointed out that the lack of an x64 Gears plugin is rather silly?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586500</id>
	<title>Long (relatively) user here.</title>
	<author>pwnies</author>
	<datestamp>1262080980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been using a mix of chrome and chromium on linux now as my primary browser for the last six months. I'm surprised at how stable it actually is (especially now). When I first started using it, the chromium builds weren't integrated into the UI very well, and were very finicky (especially with plugins). Now though, I've had zero crashes with the latest build (4.0.266.0) that I'm using. Flash works great under Ubuntu 9.04 with chrome, the dom inspector is up and running, networking options are now available (an improvement from the previous chromium build I was using), complex scripts (hebrew, arabic, etc) are working, and UI is operating exactly how you'd expect it to. Oddly enough, the only problem I'm having with it, is if the width of a text input box goes larger than around 600 pixels, I can't select the text outside of that 600px with my mouse (not that it's a problem, I just click elsewhere and use my lovely keyboard to get me where I need to be). Other than that, zero problems. Very happy with it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using a mix of chrome and chromium on linux now as my primary browser for the last six months .
I 'm surprised at how stable it actually is ( especially now ) .
When I first started using it , the chromium builds were n't integrated into the UI very well , and were very finicky ( especially with plugins ) .
Now though , I 've had zero crashes with the latest build ( 4.0.266.0 ) that I 'm using .
Flash works great under Ubuntu 9.04 with chrome , the dom inspector is up and running , networking options are now available ( an improvement from the previous chromium build I was using ) , complex scripts ( hebrew , arabic , etc ) are working , and UI is operating exactly how you 'd expect it to .
Oddly enough , the only problem I 'm having with it , is if the width of a text input box goes larger than around 600 pixels , I ca n't select the text outside of that 600px with my mouse ( not that it 's a problem , I just click elsewhere and use my lovely keyboard to get me where I need to be ) .
Other than that , zero problems .
Very happy with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using a mix of chrome and chromium on linux now as my primary browser for the last six months.
I'm surprised at how stable it actually is (especially now).
When I first started using it, the chromium builds weren't integrated into the UI very well, and were very finicky (especially with plugins).
Now though, I've had zero crashes with the latest build (4.0.266.0) that I'm using.
Flash works great under Ubuntu 9.04 with chrome, the dom inspector is up and running, networking options are now available (an improvement from the previous chromium build I was using), complex scripts (hebrew, arabic, etc) are working, and UI is operating exactly how you'd expect it to.
Oddly enough, the only problem I'm having with it, is if the width of a text input box goes larger than around 600 pixels, I can't select the text outside of that 600px with my mouse (not that it's a problem, I just click elsewhere and use my lovely keyboard to get me where I need to be).
Other than that, zero problems.
Very happy with it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586490</id>
	<title>Extensions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262080920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering that the Linux version is a beta and extension support is only available in the betas, they have a surprisingly large number of extensions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering that the Linux version is a beta and extension support is only available in the betas , they have a surprisingly large number of extensions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering that the Linux version is a beta and extension support is only available in the betas, they have a surprisingly large number of extensions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586950</id>
	<title>how to enable flash</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262083320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to use flash on linux create a plugins directory inside chrome install dir and copy the so library from firefox plugins dir, note that you should use 32 bit flash if install 32 bit chrome or 64 bit if it the case now modify the shortcut to chrome to run with --enable plugins it should run fine now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to use flash on linux create a plugins directory inside chrome install dir and copy the so library from firefox plugins dir , note that you should use 32 bit flash if install 32 bit chrome or 64 bit if it the case now modify the shortcut to chrome to run with --enable plugins it should run fine now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to use flash on linux create a plugins directory inside chrome install dir and copy the so library from firefox plugins dir, note that you should use 32 bit flash if install 32 bit chrome or 64 bit if it the case now modify the shortcut to chrome to run with --enable plugins it should run fine now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586672</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1262081880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got Flash working just fine with Chrome and openSUSE 11.2, but I manually had to copy the file to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt/google/chrome/plugins I believe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got Flash working just fine with Chrome and openSUSE 11.2 , but I manually had to copy the file to /opt/google/chrome/plugins I believe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got Flash working just fine with Chrome and openSUSE 11.2, but I manually had to copy the file to /opt/google/chrome/plugins I believe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586662</id>
	<title>Re:Fix how it handles tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262081820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now that extensions are supported, there are a few out there that provide an alternative method. In general, they usually provide a button on the toolbar which, when clicked, opens a dropdown listing of your open tabs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that extensions are supported , there are a few out there that provide an alternative method .
In general , they usually provide a button on the toolbar which , when clicked , opens a dropdown listing of your open tabs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that extensions are supported, there are a few out there that provide an alternative method.
In general, they usually provide a button on the toolbar which, when clicked, opens a dropdown listing of your open tabs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588608</id>
	<title>Re:Long (relatively) user here.</title>
	<author>Qzukk</author>
	<datestamp>1262090340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a "bug" in slashdot's HTML or something.  There's a &lt;div style="display: block;" id="slug-Bottom" class="slug"&gt;&lt;/div&gt; tag with no content that is located in the HTML just after the QOTD but the stylesheet places it just above the QOTD on the right side of the screen.  I haven't installed adblock and both fsdn and slashdot's domains are allowed in NoScript so it doesn't seem to be a blocked ad, and otherwise has no content at all.  It sticks up far enough that it covers the bottom right corner of the reply box when you're replying to a story itself or replying to the last comment of the story.  According to DOM Inspector, its rules come from <a href="http://a.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css?T\_2\_5\_0\_283" title="fsdn.com">http://a.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css?T\_2\_5\_0\_283</a> [fsdn.com]  and has a width of 336px and a height of 250px and is absolutely positioned at the right, with "bottom: 100\%" which places the bottom 100\% from the bottom of the footer div (in other words, it ends at the top of the footer div).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a " bug " in slashdot 's HTML or something .
There 's a tag with no content that is located in the HTML just after the QOTD but the stylesheet places it just above the QOTD on the right side of the screen .
I have n't installed adblock and both fsdn and slashdot 's domains are allowed in NoScript so it does n't seem to be a blocked ad , and otherwise has no content at all .
It sticks up far enough that it covers the bottom right corner of the reply box when you 're replying to a story itself or replying to the last comment of the story .
According to DOM Inspector , its rules come from http : //a.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css ? T \ _2 \ _5 \ _0 \ _283 [ fsdn.com ] and has a width of 336px and a height of 250px and is absolutely positioned at the right , with " bottom : 100 \ % " which places the bottom 100 \ % from the bottom of the footer div ( in other words , it ends at the top of the footer div ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a "bug" in slashdot's HTML or something.
There's a  tag with no content that is located in the HTML just after the QOTD but the stylesheet places it just above the QOTD on the right side of the screen.
I haven't installed adblock and both fsdn and slashdot's domains are allowed in NoScript so it doesn't seem to be a blocked ad, and otherwise has no content at all.
It sticks up far enough that it covers the bottom right corner of the reply box when you're replying to a story itself or replying to the last comment of the story.
According to DOM Inspector, its rules come from http://a.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css?T\_2\_5\_0\_283 [fsdn.com]  and has a width of 336px and a height of 250px and is absolutely positioned at the right, with "bottom: 100\%" which places the bottom 100\% from the bottom of the footer div (in other words, it ends at the top of the footer div).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30603614</id>
	<title>Re:Fix how it handles tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262291760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Firefox's current tab behavior is *the* reason that made me decide to stop using Firefox when 2.0 came out.  I used to have 15 to 20 tabs open very often when I used Firefox 1.x.  I found 2.0 unusable because navigating to tabs that disappeared to the left or right was painful.  And when I middle clicked on a link I couldn't see a tab being opened and so wasn't sure whether I clicked the link or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firefox 's current tab behavior is * the * reason that made me decide to stop using Firefox when 2.0 came out .
I used to have 15 to 20 tabs open very often when I used Firefox 1.x .
I found 2.0 unusable because navigating to tabs that disappeared to the left or right was painful .
And when I middle clicked on a link I could n't see a tab being opened and so was n't sure whether I clicked the link or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firefox's current tab behavior is *the* reason that made me decide to stop using Firefox when 2.0 came out.
I used to have 15 to 20 tabs open very often when I used Firefox 1.x.
I found 2.0 unusable because navigating to tabs that disappeared to the left or right was painful.
And when I middle clicked on a link I couldn't see a tab being opened and so wasn't sure whether I clicked the link or not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30613540</id>
	<title>Love it</title>
	<author>AnibalOjeda</author>
	<datestamp>1230818100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ive been using Chrome since the early alpha stages of the Ubuntu  build &amp; i have to say i never used firefox ever again. I just can do everything i want to with a browser &amp; FAST!!
IS time for FIREFOX to do something about their speed. Is Google can do this im sure they also can..</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ive been using Chrome since the early alpha stages of the Ubuntu build &amp; i have to say i never used firefox ever again .
I just can do everything i want to with a browser &amp; FAST ! !
IS time for FIREFOX to do something about their speed .
Is Google can do this im sure they also can. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ive been using Chrome since the early alpha stages of the Ubuntu  build &amp; i have to say i never used firefox ever again.
I just can do everything i want to with a browser &amp; FAST!!
IS time for FIREFOX to do something about their speed.
Is Google can do this im sure they also can..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589894</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>jonadab</author>
	<datestamp>1262100540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; I thought flash not working is a feature.<br><br>Yeah, but Firefox has that too (optionally).  It's called FlashBlock, and what really rocks is that you can over-ride it and enable Flash just for a specific piece of content (e.g., an embedded video on your friend's blog) without turning it on for every stupid Flash thing on the whole web, or even the whole page.<br><br>Believe me, if it weren't for FlashBlock, I wouldn't have Flash installed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I thought flash not working is a feature.Yeah , but Firefox has that too ( optionally ) .
It 's called FlashBlock , and what really rocks is that you can over-ride it and enable Flash just for a specific piece of content ( e.g. , an embedded video on your friend 's blog ) without turning it on for every stupid Flash thing on the whole web , or even the whole page.Believe me , if it were n't for FlashBlock , I would n't have Flash installed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I thought flash not working is a feature.Yeah, but Firefox has that too (optionally).
It's called FlashBlock, and what really rocks is that you can over-ride it and enable Flash just for a specific piece of content (e.g., an embedded video on your friend's blog) without turning it on for every stupid Flash thing on the whole web, or even the whole page.Believe me, if it weren't for FlashBlock, I wouldn't have Flash installed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30593168</id>
	<title>Re:UI responsiveness</title>
	<author>MBGMorden</author>
	<datestamp>1259854740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It can't be just XUL.  Firefox is pretty snappy on both Windows and Mac systems.  Not a rocket, but still responsive.  On Linux though Firefox - and even other browsers using Gecko like Galeon or Epiphany (the normal non-webkit version) - are just slow to the point of being painful to use.  The web browsing alone was a major part of keeping me out of Linux more often.</p><p>Chromium however, hauls ass on Linux.  Sure, there's a few extensions I miss, but overall I'm willing to deal with that for the faster response.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It ca n't be just XUL .
Firefox is pretty snappy on both Windows and Mac systems .
Not a rocket , but still responsive .
On Linux though Firefox - and even other browsers using Gecko like Galeon or Epiphany ( the normal non-webkit version ) - are just slow to the point of being painful to use .
The web browsing alone was a major part of keeping me out of Linux more often.Chromium however , hauls ass on Linux .
Sure , there 's a few extensions I miss , but overall I 'm willing to deal with that for the faster response .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It can't be just XUL.
Firefox is pretty snappy on both Windows and Mac systems.
Not a rocket, but still responsive.
On Linux though Firefox - and even other browsers using Gecko like Galeon or Epiphany (the normal non-webkit version) - are just slow to the point of being painful to use.
The web browsing alone was a major part of keeping me out of Linux more often.Chromium however, hauls ass on Linux.
Sure, there's a few extensions I miss, but overall I'm willing to deal with that for the faster response.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587554</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262085480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flash works fine for me.  I'm running the Chrome beta in a 64bit version of Ubuntu. This is a test machine, and I only tried the Adobe plug-in for Chrome.  I haven't tried using Gnash, and I'm not sure if that would make a difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash works fine for me .
I 'm running the Chrome beta in a 64bit version of Ubuntu .
This is a test machine , and I only tried the Adobe plug-in for Chrome .
I have n't tried using Gnash , and I 'm not sure if that would make a difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash works fine for me.
I'm running the Chrome beta in a 64bit version of Ubuntu.
This is a test machine, and I only tried the Adobe plug-in for Chrome.
I haven't tried using Gnash, and I'm not sure if that would make a difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586996</id>
	<title>Re:Getting Flash to Work</title>
	<author>Hel Toupee</author>
	<datestamp>1262083560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Adobe has an 'Alpha' 64-bit Flash player out for Linux.  It's kept up-to-date (well, sort of).  I would consider it mid-Beta quality.  Actually, it works just about as well as the 32bit official version, so, draw whatever conclusions you like.  It's available on their 'Labs' section.  Don't bother with the installer, it breaks things.  Important things.  Instead, just extract the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.so and link it up yourself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Adobe has an 'Alpha ' 64-bit Flash player out for Linux .
It 's kept up-to-date ( well , sort of ) .
I would consider it mid-Beta quality .
Actually , it works just about as well as the 32bit official version , so , draw whatever conclusions you like .
It 's available on their 'Labs ' section .
Do n't bother with the installer , it breaks things .
Important things .
Instead , just extract the .so and link it up yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Adobe has an 'Alpha' 64-bit Flash player out for Linux.
It's kept up-to-date (well, sort of).
I would consider it mid-Beta quality.
Actually, it works just about as well as the 32bit official version, so, draw whatever conclusions you like.
It's available on their 'Labs' section.
Don't bother with the installer, it breaks things.
Important things.
Instead, just extract the .so and link it up yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587114</id>
	<title>Re:Flash not working</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1262084100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I thought flash not working is a feature.</i> </p><p>To the geek.</p><p>To everyone else it is a show-stopper.</p><p>This rule applies to any program, add-on, plug-in, or extension that is considered an essntial download by almost every OSX and Windows user.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought flash not working is a feature .
To the geek.To everyone else it is a show-stopper.This rule applies to any program , add-on , plug-in , or extension that is considered an essntial download by almost every OSX and Windows user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought flash not working is a feature.
To the geek.To everyone else it is a show-stopper.This rule applies to any program, add-on, plug-in, or extension that is considered an essntial download by almost every OSX and Windows user.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30590000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587084
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30599094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586662
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30601272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30603614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587568
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30599034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587188
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30592196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30598906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30599840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30590980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1938231_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30593168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30593168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586798
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589334
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587642
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30590000
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591680
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30598906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588518
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589202
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586564
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586880
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587162
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586884
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586894
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30590980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586638
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586956
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586906
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30603614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30599094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586870
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587568
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586992
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586662
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30592196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30592524
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586412
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587408
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30599034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586578
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587276
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589038
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589234
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591164
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30599840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30589894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587114
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587320
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30601272
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30591652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1938231.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30586946
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30588608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1938231.30587558
</commentlist>
</conversation>
