<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_31_2032255</id>
	<title>The Twelve Most Tarnished Brands In Tech</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1262248380000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>harrymcc writes <i>"Polaroid, Netscape, CompuServe, Westinghouse, Heathkit &mdash; these were once among the most respected names in the technology business. They're still around, but <a href="http://technologizer.com/2009/12/30/tarnished-brands/">what's happened to them is just plain sad</a>. I took a look at the tragic fates of a dozen mighty brands that have, in one way or another, fallen on hard times."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>harrymcc writes " Polaroid , Netscape , CompuServe , Westinghouse , Heathkit    these were once among the most respected names in the technology business .
They 're still around , but what 's happened to them is just plain sad .
I took a look at the tragic fates of a dozen mighty brands that have , in one way or another , fallen on hard times .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>harrymcc writes "Polaroid, Netscape, CompuServe, Westinghouse, Heathkit — these were once among the most respected names in the technology business.
They're still around, but what's happened to them is just plain sad.
I took a look at the tragic fates of a dozen mighty brands that have, in one way or another, fallen on hard times.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609982</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>scatterfingers</author>
	<datestamp>1262255160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You read the discussions on this site (who cares about news, really? and have they ever?) and you can't think of anything to recommend Slashdot? Look, I know this site used to be way cooler back when everything was way cooler, but Slashdot is doing just fine, thanks, and if you want to have a really, really good discussion about anything (including the good old days when Heathkit was the shit and we were all building our own shortwave radios) this is the place to go. Where else? Engaget? Gizmodo? Not even close. Not even in the same universe.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You read the discussions on this site ( who cares about news , really ?
and have they ever ?
) and you ca n't think of anything to recommend Slashdot ?
Look , I know this site used to be way cooler back when everything was way cooler , but Slashdot is doing just fine , thanks , and if you want to have a really , really good discussion about anything ( including the good old days when Heathkit was the shit and we were all building our own shortwave radios ) this is the place to go .
Where else ?
Engaget ? Gizmodo ?
Not even close .
Not even in the same universe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You read the discussions on this site (who cares about news, really?
and have they ever?
) and you can't think of anything to recommend Slashdot?
Look, I know this site used to be way cooler back when everything was way cooler, but Slashdot is doing just fine, thanks, and if you want to have a really, really good discussion about anything (including the good old days when Heathkit was the shit and we were all building our own shortwave radios) this is the place to go.
Where else?
Engaget? Gizmodo?
Not even close.
Not even in the same universe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611264</id>
	<title>Re:Napster was respected when?</title>
	<author>reub2000</author>
	<datestamp>1262265720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This article is about brands, not technology or innovation. The fact that name napster was once synonymous with p2p makes it a pretty significant brand.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This article is about brands , not technology or innovation .
The fact that name napster was once synonymous with p2p makes it a pretty significant brand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article is about brands, not technology or innovation.
The fact that name napster was once synonymous with p2p makes it a pretty significant brand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611250</id>
	<title>Re:reverse effect?</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1262265600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>DIVX is not even the same company as who created DivX.</p></div><p>Neither is the Westinghouse that made my 47" HD Monitor and the candelabra bulbs I bought yesterday the same company it was before it bought-and-became CBS.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>How they weren't sued to oblivion, I have no idea.</p></div><p>Which one? Oh, right: either one.</p><p>Anyway, the rules are: was a big name and successful, died, then whored out their trademarked name recognition for unrelated and usually substandard products. Digital VIdeo eXpress was never successful and existed only inside the doors of Circuit City; the codec is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>DIVX is not even the same company as who created DivX.Neither is the Westinghouse that made my 47 " HD Monitor and the candelabra bulbs I bought yesterday the same company it was before it bought-and-became CBS.How they were n't sued to oblivion , I have no idea.Which one ?
Oh , right : either one.Anyway , the rules are : was a big name and successful , died , then whored out their trademarked name recognition for unrelated and usually substandard products .
Digital VIdeo eXpress was never successful and existed only inside the doors of Circuit City ; the codec is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DIVX is not even the same company as who created DivX.Neither is the Westinghouse that made my 47" HD Monitor and the candelabra bulbs I bought yesterday the same company it was before it bought-and-became CBS.How they weren't sued to oblivion, I have no idea.Which one?
Oh, right: either one.Anyway, the rules are: was a big name and successful, died, then whored out their trademarked name recognition for unrelated and usually substandard products.
Digital VIdeo eXpress was never successful and existed only inside the doors of Circuit City; the codec is.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609666</id>
	<title>Tarnished</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262253300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A tarnished brand would be a once-great brand whose public image has faltered. Only some of these brands fit that description. Others (Commodore, Polaroid) still are held in high regard, though they have ceased to be profitable companies.</p><p>Brands that should have made the list: Hewlett-Packard, Monster Cables, AOL, Sony. Sony is the opposite of a brand like Polaroid, in that their public image has taken some hits, but they are still doing strong business. Microsoft would have qualified as tarnished two years ago, but they've made quite a comeback.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A tarnished brand would be a once-great brand whose public image has faltered .
Only some of these brands fit that description .
Others ( Commodore , Polaroid ) still are held in high regard , though they have ceased to be profitable companies.Brands that should have made the list : Hewlett-Packard , Monster Cables , AOL , Sony .
Sony is the opposite of a brand like Polaroid , in that their public image has taken some hits , but they are still doing strong business .
Microsoft would have qualified as tarnished two years ago , but they 've made quite a comeback .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A tarnished brand would be a once-great brand whose public image has faltered.
Only some of these brands fit that description.
Others (Commodore, Polaroid) still are held in high regard, though they have ceased to be profitable companies.Brands that should have made the list: Hewlett-Packard, Monster Cables, AOL, Sony.
Sony is the opposite of a brand like Polaroid, in that their public image has taken some hits, but they are still doing strong business.
Microsoft would have qualified as tarnished two years ago, but they've made quite a comeback.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611424</id>
	<title>How dare they tarnish Westinghouse !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262267340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Japanese paid good money for Westinghouse !</p><p>How dare you tarnish the good money of Japanese !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Japanese paid good money for Westinghouse ! How dare you tarnish the good money of Japanese !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Japanese paid good money for Westinghouse !How dare you tarnish the good money of Japanese !</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610038</id>
	<title>Re:Packard Bell for the WIN!</title>
	<author>Bel Riose</author>
	<datestamp>1262255460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a matter of fact I'm writing this reply on a three year old Packard Bell notebook. As far as I can tell they aren't that bad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a matter of fact I 'm writing this reply on a three year old Packard Bell notebook .
As far as I can tell they are n't that bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a matter of fact I'm writing this reply on a three year old Packard Bell notebook.
As far as I can tell they aren't that bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610260</id>
	<title>Re:Some substitutions</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262257020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, Napster was one of (!) the first. And despite it not even being the biggest by far, it was the one that got the most media coverage.<br>I remember using Scour Exchange back then. It was a wayy bigger network. So in my book, SX is the one to remember.<br>But hey, you can&rsquo;t argue, that Napster fell from even that little grace, when they became a Bertelsmann pay-service with DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , Napster was one of ( !
) the first .
And despite it not even being the biggest by far , it was the one that got the most media coverage.I remember using Scour Exchange back then .
It was a wayy bigger network .
So in my book , SX is the one to remember.But hey , you can    t argue , that Napster fell from even that little grace , when they became a Bertelsmann pay-service with DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, Napster was one of (!
) the first.
And despite it not even being the biggest by far, it was the one that got the most media coverage.I remember using Scour Exchange back then.
It was a wayy bigger network.
So in my book, SX is the one to remember.But hey, you can’t argue, that Napster fell from even that little grace, when they became a Bertelsmann pay-service with DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30621344</id>
	<title>Re:HP didn't make the list?</title>
	<author>MrResistor</author>
	<datestamp>1230900720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But they're still doing alright as a company, and they're my first choice for laptops and printers. I won't deny that they've fallen from their once lofty position, but they haven't gone to anywhere near the depths of some.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But they 're still doing alright as a company , and they 're my first choice for laptops and printers .
I wo n't deny that they 've fallen from their once lofty position , but they have n't gone to anywhere near the depths of some .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But they're still doing alright as a company, and they're my first choice for laptops and printers.
I won't deny that they've fallen from their once lofty position, but they haven't gone to anywhere near the depths of some.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610562</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>0xdeadbeef</author>
	<datestamp>1262259120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, Reddit and Digg have killed Slashdot. What's the point of using editors as gatekeepers when they refuse to edit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , Reddit and Digg have killed Slashdot .
What 's the point of using editors as gatekeepers when they refuse to edit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, Reddit and Digg have killed Slashdot.
What's the point of using editors as gatekeepers when they refuse to edit?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611448</id>
	<title>Re:Packard Bell for the WIN!</title>
	<author>tenton</author>
	<datestamp>1262267520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Packaged Hell, as we used to call them. You too can own your own little hell; how they could cram so much pain into such a small package defied belief.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Packaged Hell , as we used to call them .
You too can own your own little hell ; how they could cram so much pain into such a small package defied belief .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Packaged Hell, as we used to call them.
You too can own your own little hell; how they could cram so much pain into such a small package defied belief.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610010</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1262255280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not a news site. This is a discussion site. And that's the way I like it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not a news site .
This is a discussion site .
And that 's the way I like it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not a news site.
This is a discussion site.
And that's the way I like it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610348</id>
	<title>Re:digital</title>
	<author>BitterOak</author>
	<datestamp>1262257500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget DEC also had one of the first 64 bit CPUs to be widely used.  And their filesystem AdvFS did just about everything ZFS does approximately 12 years earlier!</p><p>And the first time I ever used a computer as a kid was playing Dungeon on a VAX.  I was using a DECWriter hardcopy terminal and I kept the printouts for a very long time.  Looked for them recently when cleaning the house, but alas, they seem to be gone.</p><p>I couldn't believe it when they were bought out by Compaq.  I just couldn't believe it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget DEC also had one of the first 64 bit CPUs to be widely used .
And their filesystem AdvFS did just about everything ZFS does approximately 12 years earlier ! And the first time I ever used a computer as a kid was playing Dungeon on a VAX .
I was using a DECWriter hardcopy terminal and I kept the printouts for a very long time .
Looked for them recently when cleaning the house , but alas , they seem to be gone.I could n't believe it when they were bought out by Compaq .
I just could n't believe it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget DEC also had one of the first 64 bit CPUs to be widely used.
And their filesystem AdvFS did just about everything ZFS does approximately 12 years earlier!And the first time I ever used a computer as a kid was playing Dungeon on a VAX.
I was using a DECWriter hardcopy terminal and I kept the printouts for a very long time.
Looked for them recently when cleaning the house, but alas, they seem to be gone.I couldn't believe it when they were bought out by Compaq.
I just couldn't believe it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610586</id>
	<title>Re:How about Tektronix?</title>
	<author>Bassman59</author>
	<datestamp>1262259360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is Tektronix still making anything? It used to be THE brand for oscilloscopes, but I haven't heard anything about them since the 7000 series.</p></div><p>Absolutely, Tektronix is still in business. Though they were bought by Fluke a couple of years ago, they seem unaffected by that. There's still a 3-way race between Tek, Agilent and LeCroy in high-end 'scopes, but the good Tek stuff is still good.</p><p>I have a brand new DPO3054 sitting on my desk<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Tektronix still making anything ?
It used to be THE brand for oscilloscopes , but I have n't heard anything about them since the 7000 series.Absolutely , Tektronix is still in business .
Though they were bought by Fluke a couple of years ago , they seem unaffected by that .
There 's still a 3-way race between Tek , Agilent and LeCroy in high-end 'scopes , but the good Tek stuff is still good.I have a brand new DPO3054 sitting on my desk : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Tektronix still making anything?
It used to be THE brand for oscilloscopes, but I haven't heard anything about them since the 7000 series.Absolutely, Tektronix is still in business.
Though they were bought by Fluke a couple of years ago, they seem unaffected by that.
There's still a 3-way race between Tek, Agilent and LeCroy in high-end 'scopes, but the good Tek stuff is still good.I have a brand new DPO3054 sitting on my desk :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610996</id>
	<title>Re:HP -- Blame Carly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262263080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's correct.  Carly did in fact fire all the engineers and hire sales people.  So after 2 years they had nothing new to sell nor understood how their own equipment worked.  I had top tier support during that time and the 4 hour support experts could not find an engineer to diagnose anything server related.  It was really very sad.  The guy I was working with also thought he was next to get fired.  And don't even talk about the printer engineers.  I heard they all got kicked out via email.</p><p>So innovation?  No, Carly Fiorina destroyed HP.  She left a gaping wound that they haven't recovered from yet.</p><p>She destroyed their most valuable asset- the ability to out engineer a guy in India and Taiwan with 3 doctorates and no experience.  Big loss.  Too bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's correct .
Carly did in fact fire all the engineers and hire sales people .
So after 2 years they had nothing new to sell nor understood how their own equipment worked .
I had top tier support during that time and the 4 hour support experts could not find an engineer to diagnose anything server related .
It was really very sad .
The guy I was working with also thought he was next to get fired .
And do n't even talk about the printer engineers .
I heard they all got kicked out via email.So innovation ?
No , Carly Fiorina destroyed HP .
She left a gaping wound that they have n't recovered from yet.She destroyed their most valuable asset- the ability to out engineer a guy in India and Taiwan with 3 doctorates and no experience .
Big loss .
Too bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's correct.
Carly did in fact fire all the engineers and hire sales people.
So after 2 years they had nothing new to sell nor understood how their own equipment worked.
I had top tier support during that time and the 4 hour support experts could not find an engineer to diagnose anything server related.
It was really very sad.
The guy I was working with also thought he was next to get fired.
And don't even talk about the printer engineers.
I heard they all got kicked out via email.So innovation?
No, Carly Fiorina destroyed HP.
She left a gaping wound that they haven't recovered from yet.She destroyed their most valuable asset- the ability to out engineer a guy in India and Taiwan with 3 doctorates and no experience.
Big loss.
Too bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610502</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>WaywardGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1262258580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>She wasn't the only one. I joined HP in 1988, and the job was horible. Donuts on Friday disapeared the week I arrived. the "HP Way" was being scuttled. I could only take it a year and a half, and then I moved on to more intresting work. The problem was that David Packard had retired from the board and no longer guided the company. It got so bad, he came out of retirement a couple years later to put HP back on track. When he passed away, there was no way to replace him. Stockholders always lean towards the likes of Carly Florina, for the reasons already described - short-term profits. It takes an genius evangelist with nearly unlimited power to keep a company great. Take a look at what's happening at Microsoft since Bill stepped back, and how the stock market follows Steve Job's health.</p><p>Anyway, I veiw all those famous brands mentioned in TFA quite differently. What they have in common is that they have faded, but that's all. Heathkit is a brand spoken even today in awe of what they did for America. Polorooid revolutionized film based photography, and faded into obscurity when their strong leadership faded. Westinghouse faded through conglomeration. What do they make now? Coffee or nuclear reactors? Netscape killed themselves, through incredible stupid and evil strategy - make the Internet so complicated that only Microsoft and Netscape could offer functional browsers... someone should be shot.</p><p>I reject the idea that a company the dies with it's market has failed. Sun Microsystems is the most amazing workstation vendor in history. They gave the world technologies that will benefit the world for generations. Just because my cell phone has more power than a 1990-vintage workstation doesn't make Sun less great. These are brands to be celebrated for what they did in their industry, not to be morned when their industry passes into history.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>She was n't the only one .
I joined HP in 1988 , and the job was horible .
Donuts on Friday disapeared the week I arrived .
the " HP Way " was being scuttled .
I could only take it a year and a half , and then I moved on to more intresting work .
The problem was that David Packard had retired from the board and no longer guided the company .
It got so bad , he came out of retirement a couple years later to put HP back on track .
When he passed away , there was no way to replace him .
Stockholders always lean towards the likes of Carly Florina , for the reasons already described - short-term profits .
It takes an genius evangelist with nearly unlimited power to keep a company great .
Take a look at what 's happening at Microsoft since Bill stepped back , and how the stock market follows Steve Job 's health.Anyway , I veiw all those famous brands mentioned in TFA quite differently .
What they have in common is that they have faded , but that 's all .
Heathkit is a brand spoken even today in awe of what they did for America .
Polorooid revolutionized film based photography , and faded into obscurity when their strong leadership faded .
Westinghouse faded through conglomeration .
What do they make now ?
Coffee or nuclear reactors ?
Netscape killed themselves , through incredible stupid and evil strategy - make the Internet so complicated that only Microsoft and Netscape could offer functional browsers... someone should be shot.I reject the idea that a company the dies with it 's market has failed .
Sun Microsystems is the most amazing workstation vendor in history .
They gave the world technologies that will benefit the world for generations .
Just because my cell phone has more power than a 1990-vintage workstation does n't make Sun less great .
These are brands to be celebrated for what they did in their industry , not to be morned when their industry passes into history .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>She wasn't the only one.
I joined HP in 1988, and the job was horible.
Donuts on Friday disapeared the week I arrived.
the "HP Way" was being scuttled.
I could only take it a year and a half, and then I moved on to more intresting work.
The problem was that David Packard had retired from the board and no longer guided the company.
It got so bad, he came out of retirement a couple years later to put HP back on track.
When he passed away, there was no way to replace him.
Stockholders always lean towards the likes of Carly Florina, for the reasons already described - short-term profits.
It takes an genius evangelist with nearly unlimited power to keep a company great.
Take a look at what's happening at Microsoft since Bill stepped back, and how the stock market follows Steve Job's health.Anyway, I veiw all those famous brands mentioned in TFA quite differently.
What they have in common is that they have faded, but that's all.
Heathkit is a brand spoken even today in awe of what they did for America.
Polorooid revolutionized film based photography, and faded into obscurity when their strong leadership faded.
Westinghouse faded through conglomeration.
What do they make now?
Coffee or nuclear reactors?
Netscape killed themselves, through incredible stupid and evil strategy - make the Internet so complicated that only Microsoft and Netscape could offer functional browsers... someone should be shot.I reject the idea that a company the dies with it's market has failed.
Sun Microsystems is the most amazing workstation vendor in history.
They gave the world technologies that will benefit the world for generations.
Just because my cell phone has more power than a 1990-vintage workstation doesn't make Sun less great.
These are brands to be celebrated for what they did in their industry, not to be morned when their industry passes into history.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609492</id>
	<title>Harry McCracken Week Continues!!</title>
	<author>RobotRunAmok</author>
	<datestamp>1262252280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's All Harry, All The Time!</p><p>You Give Us 20 Minutes, We'll Give You Harry!</p><p>(Feel free to submit your own slogan)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's All Harry , All The Time ! You Give Us 20 Minutes , We 'll Give You Harry !
( Feel free to submit your own slogan )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's All Harry, All The Time!You Give Us 20 Minutes, We'll Give You Harry!
(Feel free to submit your own slogan)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30634324</id>
	<title>Trademarks?</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1230978000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Supposedly, trademark law is intended to prevent consumer confusion by keeping cheap knock-offs from trading on the name of a good brand. So why does trademark law permit one company to buy a strong brand name from another? It CREATES consumer confusion by making them think the incredibly crappy new company with their cheap junk is somehow up to the standards of the golden brand name.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Supposedly , trademark law is intended to prevent consumer confusion by keeping cheap knock-offs from trading on the name of a good brand .
So why does trademark law permit one company to buy a strong brand name from another ?
It CREATES consumer confusion by making them think the incredibly crappy new company with their cheap junk is somehow up to the standards of the golden brand name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Supposedly, trademark law is intended to prevent consumer confusion by keeping cheap knock-offs from trading on the name of a good brand.
So why does trademark law permit one company to buy a strong brand name from another?
It CREATES consumer confusion by making them think the incredibly crappy new company with their cheap junk is somehow up to the standards of the golden brand name.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611926</id>
	<title>geek squad should be on the list Best Buy turned i</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1262273760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>geek squad should be on the list Best Buy turned it in to UP sell Squad and got rid of most of real techs (replaced them with people who hit up sell number over doing good tech work) remotes many more to people out side of the USA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>geek squad should be on the list Best Buy turned it in to UP sell Squad and got rid of most of real techs ( replaced them with people who hit up sell number over doing good tech work ) remotes many more to people out side of the USA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>geek squad should be on the list Best Buy turned it in to UP sell Squad and got rid of most of real techs (replaced them with people who hit up sell number over doing good tech work) remotes many more to people out side of the USA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610492</id>
	<title>Gutenberg</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262258460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well before HP printers, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes\_Gutenberg" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Gutenberg</a> [wikipedia.org] utterly dominated the printing market. For a time, virtually every printed book on the market was printed by Gutenberg.<p>

Perhaps due to no effort whatsoever made to maintain the brand, it is associated almost exclusively with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutenberg\_Bible" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">one book</a> [wikipedia.org] least popular among techies.</p><p>

Now the name is associated with <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main\_Page" title="gutenberg.org" rel="nofollow">blatantly pirated versions of books</a> [gutenberg.org]. If its current incarnation ever eeks out a profit it will certainly be sued by the entire publishing industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well before HP printers , Gutenberg [ wikipedia.org ] utterly dominated the printing market .
For a time , virtually every printed book on the market was printed by Gutenberg .
Perhaps due to no effort whatsoever made to maintain the brand , it is associated almost exclusively with one book [ wikipedia.org ] least popular among techies .
Now the name is associated with blatantly pirated versions of books [ gutenberg.org ] .
If its current incarnation ever eeks out a profit it will certainly be sued by the entire publishing industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well before HP printers, Gutenberg [wikipedia.org] utterly dominated the printing market.
For a time, virtually every printed book on the market was printed by Gutenberg.
Perhaps due to no effort whatsoever made to maintain the brand, it is associated almost exclusively with one book [wikipedia.org] least popular among techies.
Now the name is associated with blatantly pirated versions of books [gutenberg.org].
If its current incarnation ever eeks out a profit it will certainly be sued by the entire publishing industry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610410</id>
	<title>Prodigy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262257860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone remember Prodigy online hehe, I had prodigy as friends had compuserve back in the day</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone remember Prodigy online hehe , I had prodigy as friends had compuserve back in the day</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone remember Prodigy online hehe, I had prodigy as friends had compuserve back in the day</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613486</id>
	<title>Re:IMAX seems to be slipping also</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230816420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks for the info, I was wondering about this.  I went to a cinema for the first time in years the other day to see Avatar, mainly because it was 3D and supposed to be awesome.  When I got the cineplex joint they had normal and IMAX theaters running.  I think I went to an IMAX when I was a kid and I remember it being a huge dome and the screen is "all around you" feeling, and the seats were layed back like lounges.</p><p>So at Avatar I thought sweet, do the IMAX version and when I walked in I looked around and actually walked out again thinking I had the wrong door and went back to the concierge dude and checked which cimema I was supposed to be in.  Turns out it was correct.  The IMAX was bullshit, the screen was basically the same size as a normal theater, maybe a bit bigger but that was it.  I fail to see what the difference is with IMAX, is there any other benefit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks for the info , I was wondering about this .
I went to a cinema for the first time in years the other day to see Avatar , mainly because it was 3D and supposed to be awesome .
When I got the cineplex joint they had normal and IMAX theaters running .
I think I went to an IMAX when I was a kid and I remember it being a huge dome and the screen is " all around you " feeling , and the seats were layed back like lounges.So at Avatar I thought sweet , do the IMAX version and when I walked in I looked around and actually walked out again thinking I had the wrong door and went back to the concierge dude and checked which cimema I was supposed to be in .
Turns out it was correct .
The IMAX was bullshit , the screen was basically the same size as a normal theater , maybe a bit bigger but that was it .
I fail to see what the difference is with IMAX , is there any other benefit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks for the info, I was wondering about this.
I went to a cinema for the first time in years the other day to see Avatar, mainly because it was 3D and supposed to be awesome.
When I got the cineplex joint they had normal and IMAX theaters running.
I think I went to an IMAX when I was a kid and I remember it being a huge dome and the screen is "all around you" feeling, and the seats were layed back like lounges.So at Avatar I thought sweet, do the IMAX version and when I walked in I looked around and actually walked out again thinking I had the wrong door and went back to the concierge dude and checked which cimema I was supposed to be in.
Turns out it was correct.
The IMAX was bullshit, the screen was basically the same size as a normal theater, maybe a bit bigger but that was it.
I fail to see what the difference is with IMAX, is there any other benefit?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609772</id>
	<title>Re:Old modems</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1262253840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are those really tarnished brands, though? Or just ones that fell by the wayside? I haven't seen their gear in years, but the last I <em>did</em> see was pretty decent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are those really tarnished brands , though ?
Or just ones that fell by the wayside ?
I have n't seen their gear in years , but the last I did see was pretty decent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are those really tarnished brands, though?
Or just ones that fell by the wayside?
I haven't seen their gear in years, but the last I did see was pretty decent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610434</id>
	<title>Heathkit</title>
	<author>bromoseltzer</author>
	<datestamp>1262257980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tarnish is not the right word.  Heathkit had its <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heathkit" title="wikipedia.org">beginnings in aviation</a> [wikipedia.org] and developed into electronics kits after WW II.  Electronics equipment was generally assembled by hand until the late 60's or so, and there were substantial savings to the customer if he/she was willing to assemble it him/herself.  Then, printed circuit techniques and especially integrated circuits and automatic (and off-shore) assembly reduced the labor cost dramatically.  It was technically harder to build competitive gear at home, and the labor savings are now probably negative.  Kit building is much less interesting now, except for specialized market niches.</p><p>
So the Heath company was bought by Zenith and eventually left the general consumer electronics business entirely. (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenith\_Electronics\_Corporation" title="wikipedia.org">Zenith</a> [wikipedia.org] used to be a famous brand, by the way.  It could have been on the list.)  A company needs to seek the most profitable markets.  It's sad, but it's not a moral decision.  Change is not "tarnish".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tarnish is not the right word .
Heathkit had its beginnings in aviation [ wikipedia.org ] and developed into electronics kits after WW II .
Electronics equipment was generally assembled by hand until the late 60 's or so , and there were substantial savings to the customer if he/she was willing to assemble it him/herself .
Then , printed circuit techniques and especially integrated circuits and automatic ( and off-shore ) assembly reduced the labor cost dramatically .
It was technically harder to build competitive gear at home , and the labor savings are now probably negative .
Kit building is much less interesting now , except for specialized market niches .
So the Heath company was bought by Zenith and eventually left the general consumer electronics business entirely .
( Zenith [ wikipedia.org ] used to be a famous brand , by the way .
It could have been on the list .
) A company needs to seek the most profitable markets .
It 's sad , but it 's not a moral decision .
Change is not " tarnish " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tarnish is not the right word.
Heathkit had its beginnings in aviation [wikipedia.org] and developed into electronics kits after WW II.
Electronics equipment was generally assembled by hand until the late 60's or so, and there were substantial savings to the customer if he/she was willing to assemble it him/herself.
Then, printed circuit techniques and especially integrated circuits and automatic (and off-shore) assembly reduced the labor cost dramatically.
It was technically harder to build competitive gear at home, and the labor savings are now probably negative.
Kit building is much less interesting now, except for specialized market niches.
So the Heath company was bought by Zenith and eventually left the general consumer electronics business entirely.
(Zenith [wikipedia.org] used to be a famous brand, by the way.
It could have been on the list.
)  A company needs to seek the most profitable markets.
It's sad, but it's not a moral decision.
Change is not "tarnish".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613472</id>
	<title>Seriously, someone bury AltaVista somewhere</title>
	<author>BlortHorc</author>
	<datestamp>1230815880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember when the options were AltaVista, Yahoo, and several other completely pointless search engines.</p><p>Repeat after me: they all sucked arse. You never searched just one portal to find what you were looking for, and often you could search all of them and not find the thing you were looking at a week ago.</p><p>The reason Google owns internet search? Because as soon as they came along, it was like night and fucking day. No longer did I have to diddle around with half a dozen search engine in the vain hope that one of them would not be so stuffed with crapware for those keywords that I might actually find what I was looking for.</p><p>Oh, and second reason I am well pleased to see AltaVista on this list: when working at an ISP migrating customers from one set of DNS servers to the new ones, I had the misfortune of answering a call from a customer whose response to my query as to what browser he used was "Oh, I don't use a browser, I use the AltaVista". I would like to claim that hilarity ensued, but that would be a big fat lie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember when the options were AltaVista , Yahoo , and several other completely pointless search engines.Repeat after me : they all sucked arse .
You never searched just one portal to find what you were looking for , and often you could search all of them and not find the thing you were looking at a week ago.The reason Google owns internet search ?
Because as soon as they came along , it was like night and fucking day .
No longer did I have to diddle around with half a dozen search engine in the vain hope that one of them would not be so stuffed with crapware for those keywords that I might actually find what I was looking for.Oh , and second reason I am well pleased to see AltaVista on this list : when working at an ISP migrating customers from one set of DNS servers to the new ones , I had the misfortune of answering a call from a customer whose response to my query as to what browser he used was " Oh , I do n't use a browser , I use the AltaVista " .
I would like to claim that hilarity ensued , but that would be a big fat lie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember when the options were AltaVista, Yahoo, and several other completely pointless search engines.Repeat after me: they all sucked arse.
You never searched just one portal to find what you were looking for, and often you could search all of them and not find the thing you were looking at a week ago.The reason Google owns internet search?
Because as soon as they came along, it was like night and fucking day.
No longer did I have to diddle around with half a dozen search engine in the vain hope that one of them would not be so stuffed with crapware for those keywords that I might actually find what I was looking for.Oh, and second reason I am well pleased to see AltaVista on this list: when working at an ISP migrating customers from one set of DNS servers to the new ones, I had the misfortune of answering a call from a customer whose response to my query as to what browser he used was "Oh, I don't use a browser, I use the AltaVista".
I would like to claim that hilarity ensued, but that would be a big fat lie.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611820</id>
	<title>Interplay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262272020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interplay was once the 2nd largest producer/distributor/developer of video games. It's success include Descent, Neuromancer, Starfleet Academy, Fallout, Fallout 2, Baldur's Gate. Today, it's the playground of a French company and as far as the releases show, a vaporwares company.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interplay was once the 2nd largest producer/distributor/developer of video games .
It 's success include Descent , Neuromancer , Starfleet Academy , Fallout , Fallout 2 , Baldur 's Gate .
Today , it 's the playground of a French company and as far as the releases show , a vaporwares company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interplay was once the 2nd largest producer/distributor/developer of video games.
It's success include Descent, Neuromancer, Starfleet Academy, Fallout, Fallout 2, Baldur's Gate.
Today, it's the playground of a French company and as far as the releases show, a vaporwares company.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613016</id>
	<title>Re:Here's Another</title>
	<author>Z00L00K</author>
	<datestamp>1230804660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The most tarnished brand today must be SCO, even if they at the peak wasn't too remarkable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The most tarnished brand today must be SCO , even if they at the peak was n't too remarkable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The most tarnished brand today must be SCO, even if they at the peak wasn't too remarkable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613518</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>jdigriz</author>
	<datestamp>1230817320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like my 37" 1080p Westinghouse LCD</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like my 37 " 1080p Westinghouse LCD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like my 37" 1080p Westinghouse LCD</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609896</id>
	<title>Re:Napster was respected when?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1262254680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Napster was important because it was the first P2P program. The post-lawsuit napster <i>company</i> wasn't important, but it brought file sharing to the masses and scared the record lables as badly as the VCR scared the movie industry.</p><p>Were you asleep then or something?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Napster was important because it was the first P2P program .
The post-lawsuit napster company was n't important , but it brought file sharing to the masses and scared the record lables as badly as the VCR scared the movie industry.Were you asleep then or something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Napster was important because it was the first P2P program.
The post-lawsuit napster company wasn't important, but it brought file sharing to the masses and scared the record lables as badly as the VCR scared the movie industry.Were you asleep then or something?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613830</id>
	<title>Out of the ashes</title>
	<author>ascari</author>
	<datestamp>1230822120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Companies and brands get tarnished, almost disappear etc. all the time. It's really not that interesting. More interesting to me are that some actually are resurrected. Apple and Nintendo come to mind, as does Maserati for a mandatory car analogy. I understand that somebody actually bought the rights to the PDP-11 from DEC when things went to hell - maybe there's still hope?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Companies and brands get tarnished , almost disappear etc .
all the time .
It 's really not that interesting .
More interesting to me are that some actually are resurrected .
Apple and Nintendo come to mind , as does Maserati for a mandatory car analogy .
I understand that somebody actually bought the rights to the PDP-11 from DEC when things went to hell - maybe there 's still hope ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Companies and brands get tarnished, almost disappear etc.
all the time.
It's really not that interesting.
More interesting to me are that some actually are resurrected.
Apple and Nintendo come to mind, as does Maserati for a mandatory car analogy.
I understand that somebody actually bought the rights to the PDP-11 from DEC when things went to hell - maybe there's still hope?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610150</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>GPLDAN</author>
	<datestamp>1262256180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Two Words: Carly Fiornia<br> <br> <br>
I hope she becomes Gov of California. She'll probably try and merge with Hawaii and then half the state will fall into the ocean.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Two Words : Carly Fiornia I hope she becomes Gov of California .
She 'll probably try and merge with Hawaii and then half the state will fall into the ocean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two Words: Carly Fiornia  
I hope she becomes Gov of California.
She'll probably try and merge with Hawaii and then half the state will fall into the ocean.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30620218</id>
	<title>Re:Here's Another</title>
	<author>hyades1</author>
	<datestamp>1230927120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> And if I had the resources of a multi-million dollar corporation behind me, perhaps you might have a point.  As it is...well, the best I can say is that I was ahead of you in correcting myself...just seconds after the original post, and I should have been aware that snark is what usually comes from fat people who call anybody under 200 pounds anorexic. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if I had the resources of a multi-million dollar corporation behind me , perhaps you might have a point .
As it is...well , the best I can say is that I was ahead of you in correcting myself...just seconds after the original post , and I should have been aware that snark is what usually comes from fat people who call anybody under 200 pounds anorexic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> And if I had the resources of a multi-million dollar corporation behind me, perhaps you might have a point.
As it is...well, the best I can say is that I was ahead of you in correcting myself...just seconds after the original post, and I should have been aware that snark is what usually comes from fat people who call anybody under 200 pounds anorexic. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610954</id>
	<title>Re:Old modems</title>
	<author>shadowbearer</author>
	<datestamp>1262262780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; Yes!</p><p>
&nbsp; I bought Borland's Turbo Pascal when it came out, and built my first game with it. It was orders of magnitude better than any other programming language software - especially for pascal - that you could buy for the IBM PC at the time. Just the code editor ALONE was worth the 80 bucks or so I think I spent on it. It defined - and still does in some ways - my understanding of what professionally written software was all about.</p><p>
&nbsp; (I remember some time later showing it to my Pascal instructor at college, and he agreed that it was helluva lot better than the pascal software we worked with there - so much so that he tried to get the college to buy from Borland, but they were already tied in to a contract so it never happened. )</p><p>SB</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>  Yes !
  I bought Borland 's Turbo Pascal when it came out , and built my first game with it .
It was orders of magnitude better than any other programming language software - especially for pascal - that you could buy for the IBM PC at the time .
Just the code editor ALONE was worth the 80 bucks or so I think I spent on it .
It defined - and still does in some ways - my understanding of what professionally written software was all about .
  ( I remember some time later showing it to my Pascal instructor at college , and he agreed that it was helluva lot better than the pascal software we worked with there - so much so that he tried to get the college to buy from Borland , but they were already tied in to a contract so it never happened .
) SB  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  Yes!
  I bought Borland's Turbo Pascal when it came out, and built my first game with it.
It was orders of magnitude better than any other programming language software - especially for pascal - that you could buy for the IBM PC at the time.
Just the code editor ALONE was worth the 80 bucks or so I think I spent on it.
It defined - and still does in some ways - my understanding of what professionally written software was all about.
  (I remember some time later showing it to my Pascal instructor at college, and he agreed that it was helluva lot better than the pascal software we worked with there - so much so that he tried to get the college to buy from Borland, but they were already tied in to a contract so it never happened.
)SB
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611324</id>
	<title>SUN?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262266200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about SUN guys? Now that company is above and beyond repair...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about SUN guys ?
Now that company is above and beyond repair.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about SUN guys?
Now that company is above and beyond repair...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30615654</id>
	<title>One that coulda, shoulda, but din't..Tandy!</title>
	<author>seekertom</author>
	<datestamp>1230842640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I worked with tandy/radio shack computers for several years, right from the beginning (early 80's?). On one hand, they had the opportunity to blast past ibm and all the others, having everything in-house... design, mfg, distribution.... And, where were all the others when the Mod I came out, delivering true computing to the masses? It eventually had 5.25 in floppies, up to 4 of them, hard drives, and memory expansion boxes! and let's not forget the os called TRSDOS! that called it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:C, rather than C:! The Mod II was a true business machine, with some of the best, and perhaps almost only, affordable accounting software available over the counter, WITH support! (ignore it began written in basic, then grew up into cobol) The beloved Coco brought gaming to anyone with a tv set; they had laptops, palm-tops, and even dedicated 'internet' boxes, although internet wasn't what they called it at that time. They had networking that actually worked, and it went into countless school classrooms, quite successfully!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and they even went out on a limb to jump above the 8086 pc-types... remember the 80-186??? as used in the tandy 2000 series, with 'high' graphics and color? It also ran the first version of turbo cad, now in it's 16th edition. It beat the pants off whatever else was out there at the time. So what happened?

It seems the penny pinchers decided to hire dumb engineers (most of the 'repair' jobs on tandy mod I, coco were more re-engineer jobs and quick-fix patchups, rather than simply replacing a broken part). And they seemed to be run by folks who didn't even know what a computer was, because at a time when the whole industry was poised to leap-frog into the 21st century, tandy said, noooo, let's limit what we do in this field, it won't go anywhere anyhow!

One of the last straws was to hire 'outsiders' to run the company, but actually were axe-men, who brought great upheaval into the company with stringent dress codes and policies that stiffled creativity and initiative, and eventually buried the division.

If you knew the product line, you knew they had the 'up' on just about everyone, and coulda, shoulda been the tops, but instead, they trashed it all with some of the dumbest decisions made by corporate execs! (do ya know ANYONE who reveres the tandy/radio shack name????)

thanks fer lis'nin'    seekertom</htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked with tandy/radio shack computers for several years , right from the beginning ( early 80 's ? ) .
On one hand , they had the opportunity to blast past ibm and all the others , having everything in-house... design , mfg , distribution.... And , where were all the others when the Mod I came out , delivering true computing to the masses ?
It eventually had 5.25 in floppies , up to 4 of them , hard drives , and memory expansion boxes !
and let 's not forget the os called TRSDOS !
that called it : C , rather than C : !
The Mod II was a true business machine , with some of the best , and perhaps almost only , affordable accounting software available over the counter , WITH support !
( ignore it began written in basic , then grew up into cobol ) The beloved Coco brought gaming to anyone with a tv set ; they had laptops , palm-tops , and even dedicated 'internet ' boxes , although internet was n't what they called it at that time .
They had networking that actually worked , and it went into countless school classrooms , quite successfully !
...and they even went out on a limb to jump above the 8086 pc-types... remember the 80-186 ? ? ?
as used in the tandy 2000 series , with 'high ' graphics and color ?
It also ran the first version of turbo cad , now in it 's 16th edition .
It beat the pants off whatever else was out there at the time .
So what happened ?
It seems the penny pinchers decided to hire dumb engineers ( most of the 'repair ' jobs on tandy mod I , coco were more re-engineer jobs and quick-fix patchups , rather than simply replacing a broken part ) .
And they seemed to be run by folks who did n't even know what a computer was , because at a time when the whole industry was poised to leap-frog into the 21st century , tandy said , noooo , let 's limit what we do in this field , it wo n't go anywhere anyhow !
One of the last straws was to hire 'outsiders ' to run the company , but actually were axe-men , who brought great upheaval into the company with stringent dress codes and policies that stiffled creativity and initiative , and eventually buried the division .
If you knew the product line , you knew they had the 'up ' on just about everyone , and coulda , shoulda been the tops , but instead , they trashed it all with some of the dumbest decisions made by corporate execs !
( do ya know ANYONE who reveres the tandy/radio shack name ? ? ? ?
) thanks fer lis'nin ' seekertom</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked with tandy/radio shack computers for several years, right from the beginning (early 80's?).
On one hand, they had the opportunity to blast past ibm and all the others, having everything in-house... design, mfg, distribution.... And, where were all the others when the Mod I came out, delivering true computing to the masses?
It eventually had 5.25 in floppies, up to 4 of them, hard drives, and memory expansion boxes!
and let's not forget the os called TRSDOS!
that called it :C, rather than C:!
The Mod II was a true business machine, with some of the best, and perhaps almost only, affordable accounting software available over the counter, WITH support!
(ignore it began written in basic, then grew up into cobol) The beloved Coco brought gaming to anyone with a tv set; they had laptops, palm-tops, and even dedicated 'internet' boxes, although internet wasn't what they called it at that time.
They had networking that actually worked, and it went into countless school classrooms, quite successfully!
...and they even went out on a limb to jump above the 8086 pc-types... remember the 80-186???
as used in the tandy 2000 series, with 'high' graphics and color?
It also ran the first version of turbo cad, now in it's 16th edition.
It beat the pants off whatever else was out there at the time.
So what happened?
It seems the penny pinchers decided to hire dumb engineers (most of the 'repair' jobs on tandy mod I, coco were more re-engineer jobs and quick-fix patchups, rather than simply replacing a broken part).
And they seemed to be run by folks who didn't even know what a computer was, because at a time when the whole industry was poised to leap-frog into the 21st century, tandy said, noooo, let's limit what we do in this field, it won't go anywhere anyhow!
One of the last straws was to hire 'outsiders' to run the company, but actually were axe-men, who brought great upheaval into the company with stringent dress codes and policies that stiffled creativity and initiative, and eventually buried the division.
If you knew the product line, you knew they had the 'up' on just about everyone, and coulda, shoulda been the tops, but instead, they trashed it all with some of the dumbest decisions made by corporate execs!
(do ya know ANYONE who reveres the tandy/radio shack name????
)

thanks fer lis'nin'    seekertom</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614268</id>
	<title>Re:WANG computers</title>
	<author>grizdog</author>
	<datestamp>1230827940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wang was really one of the great one-product companies, and it wasn't the product most people associate them with, word processors.  An Wang invented the core memory, independently from IBM, who also invented it, but after Wang.  Wang had taken the precaution of getting his notes notarized so he could prove he was first, and won a lawsuit and received huge royalties not only from IBM but everyone else, until integrated circuit RAM took over.</p><p>
Wang invested that money into other projects including calculators (desktop, programmable machines, some with integrated printers and tape drives - really small computers) and word processors, and did achieve some success with those lines in the 70's, but never established the kind of critical mass that could keep up with all the fast changes in those markets.  They also never really got their minds around the real problem, which was to come up with the best software for their niche markets.  Wang was always a hardware company at heart, and getting the ideal look and feel for a word processor was simply out of their league.</p><p>Wang came up with some good OEM hardware, but really never established themselves as a company who understood the end user.  In that sense I don't think they fell so much as they got passed by by the companies that understood software and their customers better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wang was really one of the great one-product companies , and it was n't the product most people associate them with , word processors .
An Wang invented the core memory , independently from IBM , who also invented it , but after Wang .
Wang had taken the precaution of getting his notes notarized so he could prove he was first , and won a lawsuit and received huge royalties not only from IBM but everyone else , until integrated circuit RAM took over .
Wang invested that money into other projects including calculators ( desktop , programmable machines , some with integrated printers and tape drives - really small computers ) and word processors , and did achieve some success with those lines in the 70 's , but never established the kind of critical mass that could keep up with all the fast changes in those markets .
They also never really got their minds around the real problem , which was to come up with the best software for their niche markets .
Wang was always a hardware company at heart , and getting the ideal look and feel for a word processor was simply out of their league.Wang came up with some good OEM hardware , but really never established themselves as a company who understood the end user .
In that sense I do n't think they fell so much as they got passed by by the companies that understood software and their customers better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wang was really one of the great one-product companies, and it wasn't the product most people associate them with, word processors.
An Wang invented the core memory, independently from IBM, who also invented it, but after Wang.
Wang had taken the precaution of getting his notes notarized so he could prove he was first, and won a lawsuit and received huge royalties not only from IBM but everyone else, until integrated circuit RAM took over.
Wang invested that money into other projects including calculators (desktop, programmable machines, some with integrated printers and tape drives - really small computers) and word processors, and did achieve some success with those lines in the 70's, but never established the kind of critical mass that could keep up with all the fast changes in those markets.
They also never really got their minds around the real problem, which was to come up with the best software for their niche markets.
Wang was always a hardware company at heart, and getting the ideal look and feel for a word processor was simply out of their league.Wang came up with some good OEM hardware, but really never established themselves as a company who understood the end user.
In that sense I don't think they fell so much as they got passed by by the companies that understood software and their customers better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612132</id>
	<title>Heathkit!</title>
	<author>ridgecritter</author>
	<datestamp>1262276820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Long ago, in a galaxy far away, I helped my dad build a Heathkit stereo amp and an FM tuner.  I was six or seven, and it was great!  My dad knew tons about mechanical stuff and explosives, but not much about electronics beyond house and car wiring, so we got to learn a new area together.  My mom was totally cool with the burn marks on the table and the rug from stray solder blobs.  The gear worked the first time we turned it on, and it was still in use when I left home for college.  Thanks for some wonderful memories, Heathkit!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Long ago , in a galaxy far away , I helped my dad build a Heathkit stereo amp and an FM tuner .
I was six or seven , and it was great !
My dad knew tons about mechanical stuff and explosives , but not much about electronics beyond house and car wiring , so we got to learn a new area together .
My mom was totally cool with the burn marks on the table and the rug from stray solder blobs .
The gear worked the first time we turned it on , and it was still in use when I left home for college .
Thanks for some wonderful memories , Heathkit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Long ago, in a galaxy far away, I helped my dad build a Heathkit stereo amp and an FM tuner.
I was six or seven, and it was great!
My dad knew tons about mechanical stuff and explosives, but not much about electronics beyond house and car wiring, so we got to learn a new area together.
My mom was totally cool with the burn marks on the table and the rug from stray solder blobs.
The gear worked the first time we turned it on, and it was still in use when I left home for college.
Thanks for some wonderful memories, Heathkit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611348</id>
	<title>Re:reverse effect?</title>
	<author>itsenrique</author>
	<datestamp>1262266500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>thats not the same brand dude.  the DivX codec was a play on the name DIVX.</htmltext>
<tokenext>thats not the same brand dude .
the DivX codec was a play on the name DIVX .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>thats not the same brand dude.
the DivX codec was a play on the name DIVX.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610464</id>
	<title>Re:Here's Another</title>
	<author>kent\_eh</author>
	<datestamp>1262258220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Got bought out and turned into an even cheesier version of K-Tel. </p></div><p>I think that's the common theme in all companies who go from being kings of their niche to a bad memory on some year-end list</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Got bought out and turned into an even cheesier version of K-Tel .
I think that 's the common theme in all companies who go from being kings of their niche to a bad memory on some year-end list</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Got bought out and turned into an even cheesier version of K-Tel.
I think that's the common theme in all companies who go from being kings of their niche to a bad memory on some year-end list
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610082</id>
	<title>Re:Sony?</title>
	<author>Thud457</author>
	<datestamp>1262255640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sony's kind of schizophrenic.<br> <br>They still can build some pretty nice hardware.<br> <br>And their media division keeps paranoidly figuring out ways to make it useless so you won't use it to steal their shit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sony 's kind of schizophrenic .
They still can build some pretty nice hardware .
And their media division keeps paranoidly figuring out ways to make it useless so you wo n't use it to steal their shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sony's kind of schizophrenic.
They still can build some pretty nice hardware.
And their media division keeps paranoidly figuring out ways to make it useless so you won't use it to steal their shit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612226</id>
	<title>Re:Adobe</title>
	<author>jonwil</author>
	<datestamp>1262278200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think one issue for Adobe was that Apple promised a 64-bit version of Carbon (which would have allowed Adobe to port its main apps to 64-bit on mac without the need to rewrite them in Coca) but then after promising it for so long abandoning the idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think one issue for Adobe was that Apple promised a 64-bit version of Carbon ( which would have allowed Adobe to port its main apps to 64-bit on mac without the need to rewrite them in Coca ) but then after promising it for so long abandoning the idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think one issue for Adobe was that Apple promised a 64-bit version of Carbon (which would have allowed Adobe to port its main apps to 64-bit on mac without the need to rewrite them in Coca) but then after promising it for so long abandoning the idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610508</id>
	<title>Sigh...</title>
	<author>mackinaw\_apx </author>
	<datestamp>1262258580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately, you could probably also add Motorola to that list, too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , you could probably also add Motorola to that list , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, you could probably also add Motorola to that list, too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611724</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Shack</title>
	<author>sfm</author>
	<datestamp>1262270760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm reminded of the radio Shack slogan:</p><p>You've got questions, we've got blank stares</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm reminded of the radio Shack slogan : You 've got questions , we 've got blank stares</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm reminded of the radio Shack slogan:You've got questions, we've got blank stares</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612926</id>
	<title>Re:Where would 3d gaming be without...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230803160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While 3dfx *offers prayer* isn't around anymore, they never really tarnished their reputation. Perhaps the market was too fast and nVidia bought them up before they could, but they should not be placed on this list. They would go on a list of great companies killed by good intentions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While 3dfx * offers prayer * is n't around anymore , they never really tarnished their reputation .
Perhaps the market was too fast and nVidia bought them up before they could , but they should not be placed on this list .
They would go on a list of great companies killed by good intentions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While 3dfx *offers prayer* isn't around anymore, they never really tarnished their reputation.
Perhaps the market was too fast and nVidia bought them up before they could, but they should not be placed on this list.
They would go on a list of great companies killed by good intentions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610416</id>
	<title>Re:Napster was respected when?</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1262257860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Napster was important because it was the first P2P program. The post-lawsuit Napster company wasn't important, but it brought file sharing to the masses and scared the record labels as badly as the VCR scared the movie industry.</p></div><p>Scared them like the Boston Strangler scared the woman at home alone.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Napster was important because it was the first P2P program .
The post-lawsuit Napster company was n't important , but it brought file sharing to the masses and scared the record labels as badly as the VCR scared the movie industry.Scared them like the Boston Strangler scared the woman at home alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Napster was important because it was the first P2P program.
The post-lawsuit Napster company wasn't important, but it brought file sharing to the masses and scared the record labels as badly as the VCR scared the movie industry.Scared them like the Boston Strangler scared the woman at home alone.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613988</id>
	<title>Re:Adobe</title>
	<author>MtViewGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1230824460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What will <b>REALLY</b> end Adobe as a viable force is the arrival of HTML 5.0 standards for web browsers, which does most everything that Flash does. And that transition will happen faster in the next few years as the HTML 5.0 spec is finalized.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What will REALLY end Adobe as a viable force is the arrival of HTML 5.0 standards for web browsers , which does most everything that Flash does .
And that transition will happen faster in the next few years as the HTML 5.0 spec is finalized .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What will REALLY end Adobe as a viable force is the arrival of HTML 5.0 standards for web browsers, which does most everything that Flash does.
And that transition will happen faster in the next few years as the HTML 5.0 spec is finalized.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610402</id>
	<title>Napster? A once-great brand?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262257800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Napster came pre-tarnished, and if anything it's been rehabilitated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Napster came pre-tarnished , and if anything it 's been rehabilitated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Napster came pre-tarnished, and if anything it's been rehabilitated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612008</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Shack?</title>
	<author>Deadstick</author>
	<datestamp>1262274960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was back in the days when they were putting the real electronics stores out of business. Serves 'em right.</p><p>rj</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was back in the days when they were putting the real electronics stores out of business .
Serves 'em right.rj</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was back in the days when they were putting the real electronics stores out of business.
Serves 'em right.rj</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610914</id>
	<title>Polaroid now escaping Ponzi Petters</title>
	<author>ctmurray</author>
	<datestamp>1262262360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Coming out of grad school I had job interviews with Polaroid. Even to a naive young pup you could see everyone there was working themselves into an early grave. I am glad they took too long to offer me a job and I was employed elsewhere.
<br> <br>
Now they are slightly embroiled in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom\_Petters" title="wikipedia.org">Tom Petters Ponzi scheme</a> [wikipedia.org], he was a buyer of at least one fragment of Polaroid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Coming out of grad school I had job interviews with Polaroid .
Even to a naive young pup you could see everyone there was working themselves into an early grave .
I am glad they took too long to offer me a job and I was employed elsewhere .
Now they are slightly embroiled in the Tom Petters Ponzi scheme [ wikipedia.org ] , he was a buyer of at least one fragment of Polaroid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coming out of grad school I had job interviews with Polaroid.
Even to a naive young pup you could see everyone there was working themselves into an early grave.
I am glad they took too long to offer me a job and I was employed elsewhere.
Now they are slightly embroiled in the Tom Petters Ponzi scheme [wikipedia.org], he was a buyer of at least one fragment of Polaroid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610030</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>phorm</author>
	<datestamp>1262255400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nevermind HP. How about <b>Xerox</b>.  A lot of computing history originated in Xerox Parc, but nowadays you don't hear much from them. Heck, more places I know don't even by photocopiers from them.</p><p>A huge source of innovation now essentially peddles middling printers and copier machines...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevermind HP .
How about Xerox .
A lot of computing history originated in Xerox Parc , but nowadays you do n't hear much from them .
Heck , more places I know do n't even by photocopiers from them.A huge source of innovation now essentially peddles middling printers and copier machines.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevermind HP.
How about Xerox.
A lot of computing history originated in Xerox Parc, but nowadays you don't hear much from them.
Heck, more places I know don't even by photocopiers from them.A huge source of innovation now essentially peddles middling printers and copier machines...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609686</id>
	<title>Sony?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262253420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rootkits on audio CDs?  Seriously...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rootkits on audio CDs ?
Seriously.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rootkits on audio CDs?
Seriously...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610058</id>
	<title>Re:digital</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262255520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>Digital Equipment Corp, DEC, digital</i>  These folks started making  test equipment, rivaled IBM when the PDP and VAX systems roamed the data centers.  Their customer support was a pleasure to deal with.  The only time a DEC field service engineer ever told me they didn't have a part in town, he told me it was coming in on a 2:00 pm flight and he'd be at my door by 3:00.  A series of management by accountants slowly dissolved the company into take over bait. Despite making quality products they faded away.  The low bidder trumps all.</p></div><p>Ever accidentally or intentionally, pull the console cable on a PDP?  It would immediately crash the machine.   Great machine otherwise.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Digital Equipment Corp , DEC , digital These folks started making test equipment , rivaled IBM when the PDP and VAX systems roamed the data centers .
Their customer support was a pleasure to deal with .
The only time a DEC field service engineer ever told me they did n't have a part in town , he told me it was coming in on a 2 : 00 pm flight and he 'd be at my door by 3 : 00 .
A series of management by accountants slowly dissolved the company into take over bait .
Despite making quality products they faded away .
The low bidder trumps all.Ever accidentally or intentionally , pull the console cable on a PDP ?
It would immediately crash the machine .
Great machine otherwise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Digital Equipment Corp, DEC, digital  These folks started making  test equipment, rivaled IBM when the PDP and VAX systems roamed the data centers.
Their customer support was a pleasure to deal with.
The only time a DEC field service engineer ever told me they didn't have a part in town, he told me it was coming in on a 2:00 pm flight and he'd be at my door by 3:00.
A series of management by accountants slowly dissolved the company into take over bait.
Despite making quality products they faded away.
The low bidder trumps all.Ever accidentally or intentionally, pull the console cable on a PDP?
It would immediately crash the machine.
Great machine otherwise.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616</id>
	<title>Old modems</title>
	<author>Junior J. Junior III</author>
	<datestamp>1262253000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>3Com/USRobotics should be on this list.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3Com/USRobotics should be on this list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3Com/USRobotics should be on this list.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614060</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>eharvill</author>
	<datestamp>1230825240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think they've done pretty well with their c7000 blade systems in recent years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think they 've done pretty well with their c7000 blade systems in recent years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think they've done pretty well with their c7000 blade systems in recent years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>TheRealFixer</author>
	<datestamp>1262253360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think most people would blame Carly Fiorina.  She effectively took HP out of the hands of the engineers who made the company great, and put it squarely into the hands the shareholders who were concerned only with short-term stock price during the dotcom bubble.  She spurred a massive shift in culture that killed off the innovation that they were famous for, obliterated morale throughout the company, and generally made it an undesirable place to work.  The Compaq acquisition was just one aspect of her failure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think most people would blame Carly Fiorina .
She effectively took HP out of the hands of the engineers who made the company great , and put it squarely into the hands the shareholders who were concerned only with short-term stock price during the dotcom bubble .
She spurred a massive shift in culture that killed off the innovation that they were famous for , obliterated morale throughout the company , and generally made it an undesirable place to work .
The Compaq acquisition was just one aspect of her failure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think most people would blame Carly Fiorina.
She effectively took HP out of the hands of the engineers who made the company great, and put it squarely into the hands the shareholders who were concerned only with short-term stock price during the dotcom bubble.
She spurred a massive shift in culture that killed off the innovation that they were famous for, obliterated morale throughout the company, and generally made it an undesirable place to work.
The Compaq acquisition was just one aspect of her failure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610674</id>
	<title>Re:HP didn't make the list?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262260140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>They lost sight of "the HP way" about the same time they put Carly in charge. Note to HP buying up other companies to convert yourself to a service company and compete with IBM is just a waste of money if you can't get those new divisions to stop fighting with each other and actually work together towards a common goal.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They lost sight of " the HP way " about the same time they put Carly in charge .
Note to HP buying up other companies to convert yourself to a service company and compete with IBM is just a waste of money if you ca n't get those new divisions to stop fighting with each other and actually work together towards a common goal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They lost sight of "the HP way" about the same time they put Carly in charge.
Note to HP buying up other companies to convert yourself to a service company and compete with IBM is just a waste of money if you can't get those new divisions to stop fighting with each other and actually work together towards a common goal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611306</id>
	<title>Re:How about Tektronix?</title>
	<author>ChrisMaple</author>
	<datestamp>1262266080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Look at the Tektronix website, www.tek.com. Their products are expensive, and in my opinion all modern oscilloscopes are unjustifiably expensive. Modern semiconductor technology should make a 4 channel 100 MHz digital sampling oscilloscope available for under $1000 -- far under $1000. Somebody lacks vision or isn't trying hard enough.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at the Tektronix website , www.tek.com .
Their products are expensive , and in my opinion all modern oscilloscopes are unjustifiably expensive .
Modern semiconductor technology should make a 4 channel 100 MHz digital sampling oscilloscope available for under $ 1000 -- far under $ 1000 .
Somebody lacks vision or is n't trying hard enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at the Tektronix website, www.tek.com.
Their products are expensive, and in my opinion all modern oscilloscopes are unjustifiably expensive.
Modern semiconductor technology should make a 4 channel 100 MHz digital sampling oscilloscope available for under $1000 -- far under $1000.
Somebody lacks vision or isn't trying hard enough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30630490</id>
	<title>Re:reverse effect?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230977580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a week away from being 23.</p><p>I remember DIVX sucking. I remember DivX<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-) being a godsend (among pirates, anyways).</p><p>Then I remember DivX dropping the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-) and going commercial. It became yet another logo to stick on your dvd player, but offered nothing that you couldn't get elsewhere. Even at the time, VP6 was giving better results, to say nothing of x264 or even WMV9.</p><p>They also killed their high quality video streaming website, which was the only remaining thing that excelled with the DivX name.</p><p>I would say they deserve a footnote of a mention as a tarnished brand, but the brand was only ever truly strong with pirates. The general masses never really knew what DivX was and they never really cared.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a week away from being 23.I remember DIVX sucking .
I remember DivX ; - ) being a godsend ( among pirates , anyways ) .Then I remember DivX dropping the ; - ) and going commercial .
It became yet another logo to stick on your dvd player , but offered nothing that you could n't get elsewhere .
Even at the time , VP6 was giving better results , to say nothing of x264 or even WMV9.They also killed their high quality video streaming website , which was the only remaining thing that excelled with the DivX name.I would say they deserve a footnote of a mention as a tarnished brand , but the brand was only ever truly strong with pirates .
The general masses never really knew what DivX was and they never really cared .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a week away from being 23.I remember DIVX sucking.
I remember DivX ;-) being a godsend (among pirates, anyways).Then I remember DivX dropping the ;-) and going commercial.
It became yet another logo to stick on your dvd player, but offered nothing that you couldn't get elsewhere.
Even at the time, VP6 was giving better results, to say nothing of x264 or even WMV9.They also killed their high quality video streaming website, which was the only remaining thing that excelled with the DivX name.I would say they deserve a footnote of a mention as a tarnished brand, but the brand was only ever truly strong with pirates.
The general masses never really knew what DivX was and they never really cared.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611454</id>
	<title>EA was win once?</title>
	<author>malp</author>
	<datestamp>1262267580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Electronic Arts almost defines "tarnished brand," considering their origins.</p></div><p>Really? EA was founded in 1982. I remember playing their horrible sports games at my friends' houses in the late 80s and early 90s. The games were almost non-interactive, but the moms kept shelling out $40 each year for the latest version number. Madden NFL 1989... Madden NFL 1990... Madden NFL 1991... All suck; no win.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Electronic Arts almost defines " tarnished brand , " considering their origins.Really ?
EA was founded in 1982 .
I remember playing their horrible sports games at my friends ' houses in the late 80s and early 90s .
The games were almost non-interactive , but the moms kept shelling out $ 40 each year for the latest version number .
Madden NFL 1989... Madden NFL 1990... Madden NFL 1991... All suck ; no win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Electronic Arts almost defines "tarnished brand," considering their origins.Really?
EA was founded in 1982.
I remember playing their horrible sports games at my friends' houses in the late 80s and early 90s.
The games were almost non-interactive, but the moms kept shelling out $40 each year for the latest version number.
Madden NFL 1989... Madden NFL 1990... Madden NFL 1991... All suck; no win.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610078</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>Aladrin</author>
	<datestamp>1262255640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gizmodo and Engadget have way, way, way too much crap posted.  Not that Slashdot doesn't post crap, but the 'signal to noise ratio' is a lot better here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gizmodo and Engadget have way , way , way too much crap posted .
Not that Slashdot does n't post crap , but the 'signal to noise ratio ' is a lot better here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gizmodo and Engadget have way, way, way too much crap posted.
Not that Slashdot doesn't post crap, but the 'signal to noise ratio' is a lot better here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611040</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262263740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree.  Sun was arrogant.  They're hardware was great if you liked the color purple.  Just like Henry Ford- "You can have any car you want, as long as it's black."  Their servers were great because you were essentially buying a MAC.  Try running SunOS on commodity hardware.  Go beyond your ssh and telnet session and you life turns to shit pretty damn quick.</p><p>HP is/was not in the same situation as Sun.  They had the most stable commodity hardware and the best support available.  Don't even get me started about Sun's "support".  Today they a pot smoking outsourced jagoffs.  All Sun's datacenters are gone except for one in Texas.  And they deserve it.</p><p>In the end, HP were gutted with Fiorina which was no fault of their own.  Their engineers and supervisors were decapitated.  Sun was simply too arrogant all the way around to adapt to the reality of reality.  Fat, expensive, and stupid was how they went through life- and shocker- they failed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
Sun was arrogant .
They 're hardware was great if you liked the color purple .
Just like Henry Ford- " You can have any car you want , as long as it 's black .
" Their servers were great because you were essentially buying a MAC .
Try running SunOS on commodity hardware .
Go beyond your ssh and telnet session and you life turns to shit pretty damn quick.HP is/was not in the same situation as Sun .
They had the most stable commodity hardware and the best support available .
Do n't even get me started about Sun 's " support " .
Today they a pot smoking outsourced jagoffs .
All Sun 's datacenters are gone except for one in Texas .
And they deserve it.In the end , HP were gutted with Fiorina which was no fault of their own .
Their engineers and supervisors were decapitated .
Sun was simply too arrogant all the way around to adapt to the reality of reality .
Fat , expensive , and stupid was how they went through life- and shocker- they failed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
Sun was arrogant.
They're hardware was great if you liked the color purple.
Just like Henry Ford- "You can have any car you want, as long as it's black.
"  Their servers were great because you were essentially buying a MAC.
Try running SunOS on commodity hardware.
Go beyond your ssh and telnet session and you life turns to shit pretty damn quick.HP is/was not in the same situation as Sun.
They had the most stable commodity hardware and the best support available.
Don't even get me started about Sun's "support".
Today they a pot smoking outsourced jagoffs.
All Sun's datacenters are gone except for one in Texas.
And they deserve it.In the end, HP were gutted with Fiorina which was no fault of their own.
Their engineers and supervisors were decapitated.
Sun was simply too arrogant all the way around to adapt to the reality of reality.
Fat, expensive, and stupid was how they went through life- and shocker- they failed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610354</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>E IS mC(Square)</author>
	<datestamp>1262257560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>WTF? Not that I hold<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. as epitome of geek site, but are you seriously saying crap like engadget and apple-sucking gizmodo are better? I don't want to into details, but why don't you get the fuck off to those sites, like, NOW?</htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF ?
Not that I hold / .
as epitome of geek site , but are you seriously saying crap like engadget and apple-sucking gizmodo are better ?
I do n't want to into details , but why do n't you get the fuck off to those sites , like , NOW ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF?
Not that I hold /.
as epitome of geek site, but are you seriously saying crap like engadget and apple-sucking gizmodo are better?
I don't want to into details, but why don't you get the fuck off to those sites, like, NOW?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610684</id>
	<title>Lucent / Bell Labs</title>
	<author>witherstaff</author>
	<datestamp>1262260260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also the K56Flex people, Lucent - AKA Bell Labs. I know they had AT+T on that list but not the same. Livingston, bought by Lucent, was the best maker of remote access equipment. Portmasters were rock rolid for ISPs. It was impressive to see one box with 30 serial cables connecting to stand alone modems.  (Or later on in the pre VM and blade days, connecting to 30 different serial consoles.) Then the PM3s were all digital pushing the 56K ISP offering. The Portmaster 4 even let you plug a DS3 in and get 700+ modems. Very cool stuff, shame they were bought by some french company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also the K56Flex people , Lucent - AKA Bell Labs .
I know they had AT + T on that list but not the same .
Livingston , bought by Lucent , was the best maker of remote access equipment .
Portmasters were rock rolid for ISPs .
It was impressive to see one box with 30 serial cables connecting to stand alone modems .
( Or later on in the pre VM and blade days , connecting to 30 different serial consoles .
) Then the PM3s were all digital pushing the 56K ISP offering .
The Portmaster 4 even let you plug a DS3 in and get 700 + modems .
Very cool stuff , shame they were bought by some french company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also the K56Flex people, Lucent - AKA Bell Labs.
I know they had AT+T on that list but not the same.
Livingston, bought by Lucent, was the best maker of remote access equipment.
Portmasters were rock rolid for ISPs.
It was impressive to see one box with 30 serial cables connecting to stand alone modems.
(Or later on in the pre VM and blade days, connecting to 30 different serial consoles.
) Then the PM3s were all digital pushing the 56K ISP offering.
The Portmaster 4 even let you plug a DS3 in and get 700+ modems.
Very cool stuff, shame they were bought by some french company.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609534</id>
	<title>Re:Here's Another</title>
	<author>StreetStealth</author>
	<datestamp>1262252520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or how about Hyades1. Once the recipient of such moderations as "+5. Insightful" and "+5, Informative" the brand is now associated with failing to RTFA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or how about Hyades1 .
Once the recipient of such moderations as " + 5 .
Insightful " and " + 5 , Informative " the brand is now associated with failing to RTFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or how about Hyades1.
Once the recipient of such moderations as "+5.
Insightful" and "+5, Informative" the brand is now associated with failing to RTFA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452</id>
	<title>Here's Another</title>
	<author>hyades1</author>
	<datestamp>1262252040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Bell &amp; Howell.  They were respected manufacturers of projectors, binoculars and the like.  Got bought out and turned into an even cheesier version of K-Tel. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bell &amp; Howell .
They were respected manufacturers of projectors , binoculars and the like .
Got bought out and turned into an even cheesier version of K-Tel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Bell &amp; Howell.
They were respected manufacturers of projectors, binoculars and the like.
Got bought out and turned into an even cheesier version of K-Tel. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612092</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262275980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That is too funny.  'What's New' is in <i>Popular Science</i> not Popular Mechanics.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is too funny .
'What 's New ' is in Popular Science not Popular Mechanics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is too funny.
'What's New' is in Popular Science not Popular Mechanics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610088</id>
	<title>Polaroid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262255700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I like my Polaroid video camera.  Just $149.00, it shoots HD tv, and has SD card recording - up to 10 hours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I like my Polaroid video camera .
Just $ 149.00 , it shoots HD tv , and has SD card recording - up to 10 hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I like my Polaroid video camera.
Just $149.00, it shoots HD tv, and has SD card recording - up to 10 hours.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558</id>
	<title>Napster was respected when?</title>
	<author>east coast</author>
	<datestamp>1262252640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's be honest here; Napster brought nothing new to the table. They were just known on the same level that Balloon Boy's parents are known. Hadn't it been for being sued into oblivion they would hardly be a footnote in technology.<br> <br>I also shiver to think that the writer still considers Commodore the same company as they one that died in the 90s. It's the same company by name only. It's not like it did a massive transformation into oblivion like Westinghouse or Polaroid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's be honest here ; Napster brought nothing new to the table .
They were just known on the same level that Balloon Boy 's parents are known .
Had n't it been for being sued into oblivion they would hardly be a footnote in technology .
I also shiver to think that the writer still considers Commodore the same company as they one that died in the 90s .
It 's the same company by name only .
It 's not like it did a massive transformation into oblivion like Westinghouse or Polaroid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's be honest here; Napster brought nothing new to the table.
They were just known on the same level that Balloon Boy's parents are known.
Hadn't it been for being sued into oblivion they would hardly be a footnote in technology.
I also shiver to think that the writer still considers Commodore the same company as they one that died in the 90s.
It's the same company by name only.
It's not like it did a massive transformation into oblivion like Westinghouse or Polaroid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30679684</id>
	<title>I maintain printers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1231271280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...HP build quality went southerly on Carly's watch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...HP build quality went southerly on Carly 's watch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...HP build quality went southerly on Carly's watch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614194</id>
	<title>Oh dude....</title>
	<author>DG</author>
	<datestamp>1230827160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I personally owned 4 different Amigas - including installing Linux on an A3000. For a little while, I sold them. I belonged to CATS. I posted on comp.sys.amiga before the Big Split to all the subgroups. I jousted with -MB- and laughed my ass off at BLAZEMONGER! I even maintained the Amiga Netrek port for a year or so (not that I accomplished much with it)</p><p>I own an original copy of the Deathbed Vigil.</p><p>The Amiga is DEAD. Yes, there are still Amigas functioning and a tiny core of hobbyists who still get joy out of tinkering with them - and good on ya. But as a relevant component of modern computing... not a chance.</p><p>Seriously. Move on. Enjoy your retro-computing hobby, but it is really time to understand that the Amiga era is over.</p><p>DG</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I personally owned 4 different Amigas - including installing Linux on an A3000 .
For a little while , I sold them .
I belonged to CATS .
I posted on comp.sys.amiga before the Big Split to all the subgroups .
I jousted with -MB- and laughed my ass off at BLAZEMONGER !
I even maintained the Amiga Netrek port for a year or so ( not that I accomplished much with it ) I own an original copy of the Deathbed Vigil.The Amiga is DEAD .
Yes , there are still Amigas functioning and a tiny core of hobbyists who still get joy out of tinkering with them - and good on ya .
But as a relevant component of modern computing... not a chance.Seriously .
Move on .
Enjoy your retro-computing hobby , but it is really time to understand that the Amiga era is over.DG        </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I personally owned 4 different Amigas - including installing Linux on an A3000.
For a little while, I sold them.
I belonged to CATS.
I posted on comp.sys.amiga before the Big Split to all the subgroups.
I jousted with -MB- and laughed my ass off at BLAZEMONGER!
I even maintained the Amiga Netrek port for a year or so (not that I accomplished much with it)I own an original copy of the Deathbed Vigil.The Amiga is DEAD.
Yes, there are still Amigas functioning and a tiny core of hobbyists who still get joy out of tinkering with them - and good on ya.
But as a relevant component of modern computing... not a chance.Seriously.
Move on.
Enjoy your retro-computing hobby, but it is really time to understand that the Amiga era is over.DG
       </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612280</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Shack</title>
	<author>BeaverCleaver</author>
	<datestamp>1262278920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Australian/New Zealand readers can relate this to Dick Smith Electronics. Used to sell individual components, and always have at least one nerd on duty who at least knew what they were. Now they're just trying to emulate harvey norman and JB hifi selling TVs and stereos, but with a smaller selection, higher prices, and dumber staff. Component sales have also completely disappeared - at least Radio Shack can still sell a few overpriced resistors, which although expensive is a lot quicker than mail order.</p><p>Yes, I'm a former employee of Dick Smith Electronics. It's a damn shame what's happened to them, and seems to me an insane business move to move out of your niche into an already saturated market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Australian/New Zealand readers can relate this to Dick Smith Electronics .
Used to sell individual components , and always have at least one nerd on duty who at least knew what they were .
Now they 're just trying to emulate harvey norman and JB hifi selling TVs and stereos , but with a smaller selection , higher prices , and dumber staff .
Component sales have also completely disappeared - at least Radio Shack can still sell a few overpriced resistors , which although expensive is a lot quicker than mail order.Yes , I 'm a former employee of Dick Smith Electronics .
It 's a damn shame what 's happened to them , and seems to me an insane business move to move out of your niche into an already saturated market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Australian/New Zealand readers can relate this to Dick Smith Electronics.
Used to sell individual components, and always have at least one nerd on duty who at least knew what they were.
Now they're just trying to emulate harvey norman and JB hifi selling TVs and stereos, but with a smaller selection, higher prices, and dumber staff.
Component sales have also completely disappeared - at least Radio Shack can still sell a few overpriced resistors, which although expensive is a lot quicker than mail order.Yes, I'm a former employee of Dick Smith Electronics.
It's a damn shame what's happened to them, and seems to me an insane business move to move out of your niche into an already saturated market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609860</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609658</id>
	<title>Radio Shack?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262253300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Radio Shack probably should have been on there somewhere too...Way back when, they weren't too bad of a place to get some electronics stuff, back in the Heathkit days... Oh well...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Radio Shack probably should have been on there somewhere too...Way back when , they were n't too bad of a place to get some electronics stuff , back in the Heathkit days... Oh well.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Radio Shack probably should have been on there somewhere too...Way back when, they weren't too bad of a place to get some electronics stuff, back in the Heathkit days... Oh well...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612874</id>
	<title>Clayton Christensen...</title>
	<author>simplerThanPossible</author>
	<datestamp>1230802260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>said in a talk that it was DEC's demise that inspired his PhD research that he wrote up as "The Innovator's Dilemma".</p><p>It wasn't management - it's that minicomputers were replaced by workstations (Sun and the like). They went from top to bottom in a couple of years, with the same management team.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>said in a talk that it was DEC 's demise that inspired his PhD research that he wrote up as " The Innovator 's Dilemma " .It was n't management - it 's that minicomputers were replaced by workstations ( Sun and the like ) .
They went from top to bottom in a couple of years , with the same management team .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>said in a talk that it was DEC's demise that inspired his PhD research that he wrote up as "The Innovator's Dilemma".It wasn't management - it's that minicomputers were replaced by workstations (Sun and the like).
They went from top to bottom in a couple of years, with the same management team.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610888</id>
	<title>Re:Packard Bell for the WIN!</title>
	<author>shadowbearer</author>
	<datestamp>1262262180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; Some years back I used to work for a place where we (re)built a lot of low end machines that we bought in van-lots for our "financially disadvantaged" customers, paired them with equally cheap monitors, sold them for a couple hundred bucks apiece. This was back around '00 when you still couldn't buy a web-capable computer for less than $500 or so new, we sold a lot of them.</p><p>
&nbsp; As I recall PB's hardware really wasn't all that bad - at least it worked - it was the drivers and software loads that gave us the most problems.  We rebuilt hundreds of their Pentium machines, found the best drivers we could (or ran their vid drivers VGA if that was all the monitor would do) - and with a fresh, "tuned-down" windows load on them, they were acceptable surfing/email boxes, for cheap. IIRC the biggest problem we had was either with the video card drivers or with the modems - fortunately we had a lot of excess hardware modems that worked perfectly well.</p><p>
&nbsp; I haven't lived/worked in that area for a long time now, but I recall that probably half of the service calls I had in the few months before I left was working on those same boxes, mostly virus infections (including AOL *g*)</p><p>
&nbsp; Nostalgia...</p><p>SB</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>  Some years back I used to work for a place where we ( re ) built a lot of low end machines that we bought in van-lots for our " financially disadvantaged " customers , paired them with equally cheap monitors , sold them for a couple hundred bucks apiece .
This was back around '00 when you still could n't buy a web-capable computer for less than $ 500 or so new , we sold a lot of them .
  As I recall PB 's hardware really was n't all that bad - at least it worked - it was the drivers and software loads that gave us the most problems .
We rebuilt hundreds of their Pentium machines , found the best drivers we could ( or ran their vid drivers VGA if that was all the monitor would do ) - and with a fresh , " tuned-down " windows load on them , they were acceptable surfing/email boxes , for cheap .
IIRC the biggest problem we had was either with the video card drivers or with the modems - fortunately we had a lot of excess hardware modems that worked perfectly well .
  I have n't lived/worked in that area for a long time now , but I recall that probably half of the service calls I had in the few months before I left was working on those same boxes , mostly virus infections ( including AOL * g * )   Nostalgia...SB  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  Some years back I used to work for a place where we (re)built a lot of low end machines that we bought in van-lots for our "financially disadvantaged" customers, paired them with equally cheap monitors, sold them for a couple hundred bucks apiece.
This was back around '00 when you still couldn't buy a web-capable computer for less than $500 or so new, we sold a lot of them.
  As I recall PB's hardware really wasn't all that bad - at least it worked - it was the drivers and software loads that gave us the most problems.
We rebuilt hundreds of their Pentium machines, found the best drivers we could (or ran their vid drivers VGA if that was all the monitor would do) - and with a fresh, "tuned-down" windows load on them, they were acceptable surfing/email boxes, for cheap.
IIRC the biggest problem we had was either with the video card drivers or with the modems - fortunately we had a lot of excess hardware modems that worked perfectly well.
  I haven't lived/worked in that area for a long time now, but I recall that probably half of the service calls I had in the few months before I left was working on those same boxes, mostly virus infections (including AOL *g*)
  Nostalgia...SB
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609846</id>
	<title>Some substitutions</title>
	<author>swordgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1262254380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Napster doesn't belong on that list, because at its height, it was never a great or proud company--just an early one.</p><p>Packard-Bell has been a joke for so long that hardly anyone young enough to care remembers when they weren't.</p><p>Netscape doesn't really exist. They acknowledge that, but still put it on the list. Same for Netscape, and (sorta) Compuserve.</p><p>There are some others I would add to the list, though: Silicon Graphics and Atari deserve top honours. Also, hugely powerful and profitable though it may be, Electronic Arts almost defines "tarnished brand," considering their origins. Also, how about Radio Shack? Can you even get parts there anymore?</p><p>Now if we jump into the audio world, there are more than anyone can count. Advent, Sansui, Nakamichi, Hafler, Scott, etc..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Napster does n't belong on that list , because at its height , it was never a great or proud company--just an early one.Packard-Bell has been a joke for so long that hardly anyone young enough to care remembers when they were n't.Netscape does n't really exist .
They acknowledge that , but still put it on the list .
Same for Netscape , and ( sorta ) Compuserve.There are some others I would add to the list , though : Silicon Graphics and Atari deserve top honours .
Also , hugely powerful and profitable though it may be , Electronic Arts almost defines " tarnished brand , " considering their origins .
Also , how about Radio Shack ?
Can you even get parts there anymore ? Now if we jump into the audio world , there are more than anyone can count .
Advent , Sansui , Nakamichi , Hafler , Scott , etc. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Napster doesn't belong on that list, because at its height, it was never a great or proud company--just an early one.Packard-Bell has been a joke for so long that hardly anyone young enough to care remembers when they weren't.Netscape doesn't really exist.
They acknowledge that, but still put it on the list.
Same for Netscape, and (sorta) Compuserve.There are some others I would add to the list, though: Silicon Graphics and Atari deserve top honours.
Also, hugely powerful and profitable though it may be, Electronic Arts almost defines "tarnished brand," considering their origins.
Also, how about Radio Shack?
Can you even get parts there anymore?Now if we jump into the audio world, there are more than anyone can count.
Advent, Sansui, Nakamichi, Hafler, Scott, etc..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926</id>
	<title>digital</title>
	<author>tengu1sd</author>
	<datestamp>1262254860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Digital Equipment Corp, DEC, digital</i>  These folks started making  test equipment, rivaled IBM when the PDP and VAX systems roamed the data centers.  Their customer support was a pleasure to deal with.  The only time a DEC field service engineer ever told me they didn't have a part in town, he told me it was coming in on a 2:00 pm flight and he'd be at my door by 3:00.  A series of management by accountants slowly dissolved the company into take over bait. Despite making quality products they faded away.  The low bidder trumps all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Digital Equipment Corp , DEC , digital These folks started making test equipment , rivaled IBM when the PDP and VAX systems roamed the data centers .
Their customer support was a pleasure to deal with .
The only time a DEC field service engineer ever told me they did n't have a part in town , he told me it was coming in on a 2 : 00 pm flight and he 'd be at my door by 3 : 00 .
A series of management by accountants slowly dissolved the company into take over bait .
Despite making quality products they faded away .
The low bidder trumps all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Digital Equipment Corp, DEC, digital  These folks started making  test equipment, rivaled IBM when the PDP and VAX systems roamed the data centers.
Their customer support was a pleasure to deal with.
The only time a DEC field service engineer ever told me they didn't have a part in town, he told me it was coming in on a 2:00 pm flight and he'd be at my door by 3:00.
A series of management by accountants slowly dissolved the company into take over bait.
Despite making quality products they faded away.
The low bidder trumps all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611818</id>
	<title>They honored mine...</title>
	<author>El\_Oscuro</author>
	<datestamp>1262272020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>About 20 years ago, I bought a $150 car stereo and they gave me the usual warranty pitch.  It wasn't until they mentioned it also covered theft that I signed up for it.  Wouldn't you know, it was ripped off the day after I installed it?  It could have been an inside job, but it seems like a lot of effort for a $150 stereo.  Than again, I got the extra insurance for a car rental in FL and someone stole the hubcaps, so maybe there is a reason why the drone always wants to sell you the extra insurance!</htmltext>
<tokenext>About 20 years ago , I bought a $ 150 car stereo and they gave me the usual warranty pitch .
It was n't until they mentioned it also covered theft that I signed up for it .
Would n't you know , it was ripped off the day after I installed it ?
It could have been an inside job , but it seems like a lot of effort for a $ 150 stereo .
Than again , I got the extra insurance for a car rental in FL and someone stole the hubcaps , so maybe there is a reason why the drone always wants to sell you the extra insurance !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About 20 years ago, I bought a $150 car stereo and they gave me the usual warranty pitch.
It wasn't until they mentioned it also covered theft that I signed up for it.
Wouldn't you know, it was ripped off the day after I installed it?
It could have been an inside job, but it seems like a lot of effort for a $150 stereo.
Than again, I got the extra insurance for a car rental in FL and someone stole the hubcaps, so maybe there is a reason why the drone always wants to sell you the extra insurance!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609912</id>
	<title>Re:HP didn't make the list?</title>
	<author>FooAtWFU</author>
	<datestamp>1262254740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe they did, but they're still around selling of printers (and ink) and cameras and (OEM-rebranded) networking equipment and servers and the like. It's hard to argue with $122 billion in market cap.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they did , but they 're still around selling of printers ( and ink ) and cameras and ( OEM-rebranded ) networking equipment and servers and the like .
It 's hard to argue with $ 122 billion in market cap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they did, but they're still around selling of printers (and ink) and cameras and (OEM-rebranded) networking equipment and servers and the like.
It's hard to argue with $122 billion in market cap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611426</id>
	<title>Re:Oh, oh... I've got one!!!</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1262267340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it's been months since I've seen a credible "dupe" declaration here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it 's been months since I 've seen a credible " dupe " declaration here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it's been months since I've seen a credible "dupe" declaration here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613192</id>
	<title>AOL managed to ruin everything it touched</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1230808620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Netscape, Nullsoft, Compuserve, MapQuest, Digital Cities, Moviefone. Each of the the "divlets" had huge potential as independent entities while still offering innovation or tech that AOL could leverage. Instead AOL interfered with them, fucked with their culture, diverted their development efforts towards the AOL service, forced them to adopt AOL email addresses, even to use the AOL client even for business (yes really) and of course lay people off.
<p>
AOL central managed to squander all that potential. Is it any wonder most of these brands are now dead or just hollowed out husks? AOL is almost like King Midas except everything it touches turns to shit. Even Time Warner must seriously regret the day it "merged" with AOL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Netscape , Nullsoft , Compuserve , MapQuest , Digital Cities , Moviefone .
Each of the the " divlets " had huge potential as independent entities while still offering innovation or tech that AOL could leverage .
Instead AOL interfered with them , fucked with their culture , diverted their development efforts towards the AOL service , forced them to adopt AOL email addresses , even to use the AOL client even for business ( yes really ) and of course lay people off .
AOL central managed to squander all that potential .
Is it any wonder most of these brands are now dead or just hollowed out husks ?
AOL is almost like King Midas except everything it touches turns to shit .
Even Time Warner must seriously regret the day it " merged " with AOL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Netscape, Nullsoft, Compuserve, MapQuest, Digital Cities, Moviefone.
Each of the the "divlets" had huge potential as independent entities while still offering innovation or tech that AOL could leverage.
Instead AOL interfered with them, fucked with their culture, diverted their development efforts towards the AOL service, forced them to adopt AOL email addresses, even to use the AOL client even for business (yes really) and of course lay people off.
AOL central managed to squander all that potential.
Is it any wonder most of these brands are now dead or just hollowed out husks?
AOL is almost like King Midas except everything it touches turns to shit.
Even Time Warner must seriously regret the day it "merged" with AOL.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611526</id>
	<title>Re:Dell?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262268300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dell who?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dell who ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dell who?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609936</id>
	<title>Easy to summarize.</title>
	<author>Xeno man</author>
	<datestamp>1262254860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd say about half of the companies on the list were failures due to lack of vision and avoidance on making changes. If they weren't so busy trying to squeeze every buck out of their old assets and actually invested in new tech, they would still be around as the giants they once were. Now that's not true for all of them Companies like Heathkit and Napster were victims of the times. Not all markets last forever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say about half of the companies on the list were failures due to lack of vision and avoidance on making changes .
If they were n't so busy trying to squeeze every buck out of their old assets and actually invested in new tech , they would still be around as the giants they once were .
Now that 's not true for all of them Companies like Heathkit and Napster were victims of the times .
Not all markets last forever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say about half of the companies on the list were failures due to lack of vision and avoidance on making changes.
If they weren't so busy trying to squeeze every buck out of their old assets and actually invested in new tech, they would still be around as the giants they once were.
Now that's not true for all of them Companies like Heathkit and Napster were victims of the times.
Not all markets last forever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609608</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>Itninja</author>
	<datestamp>1262253000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you seen their recent blade server technology? While their support is awful, the hardware itself (namely the C-class blades) is pretty impressive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you seen their recent blade server technology ?
While their support is awful , the hardware itself ( namely the C-class blades ) is pretty impressive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you seen their recent blade server technology?
While their support is awful, the hardware itself (namely the C-class blades) is pretty impressive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612074</id>
	<title>Hayes?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262275740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm surprised I haven't seen them mentioned anywhere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised I have n't seen them mentioned anywhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised I haven't seen them mentioned anywhere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609750</id>
	<title>Where's AOL?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262253720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AOL used to be respected back in the early 1990's by more people than you'd think.</p><p>In 1993 if you asked a typical AOL user "Do you have Internet access?" they'd say "No, but I have AOL, you should get that too, it's really cool."</p><p>I'd just shake my head and walk away.</p><p>And even years later, AOL was still respected by a lot of people, I remember back in 2000 or so people would have conversations such as:</p><p>Ann: "Why don't you get cable?"</p><p>Jenny: "Are you nuts?! You can't beat AOL, I still have 2000 free minutes on my AOL dialup, LOL!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AOL used to be respected back in the early 1990 's by more people than you 'd think.In 1993 if you asked a typical AOL user " Do you have Internet access ?
" they 'd say " No , but I have AOL , you should get that too , it 's really cool .
" I 'd just shake my head and walk away.And even years later , AOL was still respected by a lot of people , I remember back in 2000 or so people would have conversations such as : Ann : " Why do n't you get cable ?
" Jenny : " Are you nuts ? !
You ca n't beat AOL , I still have 2000 free minutes on my AOL dialup , LOL !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AOL used to be respected back in the early 1990's by more people than you'd think.In 1993 if you asked a typical AOL user "Do you have Internet access?
" they'd say "No, but I have AOL, you should get that too, it's really cool.
"I'd just shake my head and walk away.And even years later, AOL was still respected by a lot of people, I remember back in 2000 or so people would have conversations such as:Ann: "Why don't you get cable?
"Jenny: "Are you nuts?!
You can't beat AOL, I still have 2000 free minutes on my AOL dialup, LOL!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610480</id>
	<title>Re:You have to rise to fall</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262258340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Packard-Bell was a respected brand for much of the 20th century. It wasn't until the Japanese took over consumer electronics and the company name was sold to an offshore investor who made crappy computers that the name fell from grace.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Packard-Bell was a respected brand for much of the 20th century .
It was n't until the Japanese took over consumer electronics and the company name was sold to an offshore investor who made crappy computers that the name fell from grace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Packard-Bell was a respected brand for much of the 20th century.
It wasn't until the Japanese took over consumer electronics and the company name was sold to an offshore investor who made crappy computers that the name fell from grace.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610822</id>
	<title>Re:Napster was respected when?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262261460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The writer <i>doesn't</i> consider Commodore the same company as the one that died in the 90s. That is the entire reason Commodore is on the list. I know, I know, the gall that I would expect you to read the article before you pass judgment on the author. Worse still, you presumably <i>looked</i> at the article or you wouldn't have known to single out Commodore as a failing of the author.</p><p>The author explicitly states that today's Commodore is nothing more than a name-for-hire, just like today's Polaroid and numerous others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The writer does n't consider Commodore the same company as the one that died in the 90s .
That is the entire reason Commodore is on the list .
I know , I know , the gall that I would expect you to read the article before you pass judgment on the author .
Worse still , you presumably looked at the article or you would n't have known to single out Commodore as a failing of the author.The author explicitly states that today 's Commodore is nothing more than a name-for-hire , just like today 's Polaroid and numerous others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The writer doesn't consider Commodore the same company as the one that died in the 90s.
That is the entire reason Commodore is on the list.
I know, I know, the gall that I would expect you to read the article before you pass judgment on the author.
Worse still, you presumably looked at the article or you wouldn't have known to single out Commodore as a failing of the author.The author explicitly states that today's Commodore is nothing more than a name-for-hire, just like today's Polaroid and numerous others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610320</id>
	<title>Re:Here's Another</title>
	<author>darkpixel2k</author>
	<datestamp>1262257380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Or how about Hyades1. Once the recipient of such moderations as "+5. Insightful" and "+5, Informative" the brand is now associated with failing to RTFA.</p></div><p>
Or how about darkpixel2k?  The brand is associated with cheap and inferior knockoffs of existing jokes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or how about Hyades1 .
Once the recipient of such moderations as " + 5 .
Insightful " and " + 5 , Informative " the brand is now associated with failing to RTFA .
Or how about darkpixel2k ?
The brand is associated with cheap and inferior knockoffs of existing jokes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or how about Hyades1.
Once the recipient of such moderations as "+5.
Insightful" and "+5, Informative" the brand is now associated with failing to RTFA.
Or how about darkpixel2k?
The brand is associated with cheap and inferior knockoffs of existing jokes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611670</id>
	<title>WANG computers</title>
	<author>hotdiggity</author>
	<datestamp>1262269980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>WANG was a brand that stood out proudly in the face of stiff competition. <p> Unfortunately, after a long period of thrusting its way into new markets, it sadly shrivelled into a limp entity that was incapable of further market penetration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WANG was a brand that stood out proudly in the face of stiff competition .
Unfortunately , after a long period of thrusting its way into new markets , it sadly shrivelled into a limp entity that was incapable of further market penetration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WANG was a brand that stood out proudly in the face of stiff competition.
Unfortunately, after a long period of thrusting its way into new markets, it sadly shrivelled into a limp entity that was incapable of further market penetration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611190</id>
	<title>Radio Shack</title>
	<author>HalAtWork</author>
	<datestamp>1262265120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Radio Shack went from a great resource for hobbyists to get their start, to a glorified alarm clock store.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Radio Shack went from a great resource for hobbyists to get their start , to a glorified alarm clock store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Radio Shack went from a great resource for hobbyists to get their start, to a glorified alarm clock store.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612616</id>
	<title>CompUSA? CircuitCity?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262285700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about CompUSA or Circuit City?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about CompUSA or Circuit City ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about CompUSA or Circuit City?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610294</id>
	<title>Another small list</title>
	<author>ZXSpectrum42</author>
	<datestamp>1262257140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some Random Companies come to my mind
1) Digital
2) CRAY
3) Siliconn Graphis
4) Borland
5) Xerox
6) Old HP
7) Compaq
8) Sun
9) Sinclair
10) Atari
11) Comodore
12) Microsoft (no visionaire left)
13) Netscape
14) Control Data

and the list goes on. Maybe some companies die
with their creators</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some Random Companies come to my mind 1 ) Digital 2 ) CRAY 3 ) Siliconn Graphis 4 ) Borland 5 ) Xerox 6 ) Old HP 7 ) Compaq 8 ) Sun 9 ) Sinclair 10 ) Atari 11 ) Comodore 12 ) Microsoft ( no visionaire left ) 13 ) Netscape 14 ) Control Data and the list goes on .
Maybe some companies die with their creators</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some Random Companies come to my mind
1) Digital
2) CRAY
3) Siliconn Graphis
4) Borland
5) Xerox
6) Old HP
7) Compaq
8) Sun
9) Sinclair
10) Atari
11) Comodore
12) Microsoft (no visionaire left)
13) Netscape
14) Control Data

and the list goes on.
Maybe some companies die
with their creators</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612602</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>linhares</author>
	<datestamp>1262285640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Slashdot is coming back in full force now that they are implementing a farmville app and the new "poke" feature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot is coming back in full force now that they are implementing a farmville app and the new " poke " feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot is coming back in full force now that they are implementing a farmville app and the new "poke" feature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611694</id>
	<title>Re:HP -- it sucked before Fiorina</title>
	<author>asackett</author>
	<datestamp>1262270280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was involved with H-P in various capacities from 1994 through 1998, pre-Carly, and the high zoot engineers for whom the company was famous were nowhere in evidence. Absolutely nowhere. The company mission statement already said that H-P was a "shareholder driven" company, and the old-timers all lamented that The HP Way was long dead.</p><p>I'm not defending Fiorina, as she was in well over her head and everyone except the BOD knew it right from the start, I'm just saying that the company was broken before she got there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was involved with H-P in various capacities from 1994 through 1998 , pre-Carly , and the high zoot engineers for whom the company was famous were nowhere in evidence .
Absolutely nowhere .
The company mission statement already said that H-P was a " shareholder driven " company , and the old-timers all lamented that The HP Way was long dead.I 'm not defending Fiorina , as she was in well over her head and everyone except the BOD knew it right from the start , I 'm just saying that the company was broken before she got there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was involved with H-P in various capacities from 1994 through 1998, pre-Carly, and the high zoot engineers for whom the company was famous were nowhere in evidence.
Absolutely nowhere.
The company mission statement already said that H-P was a "shareholder driven" company, and the old-timers all lamented that The HP Way was long dead.I'm not defending Fiorina, as she was in well over her head and everyone except the BOD knew it right from the start, I'm just saying that the company was broken before she got there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613578</id>
	<title>eBay!</title>
	<author>Niubi</author>
	<datestamp>1230818760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Soon eBay's going to be old hat, a tarnished brand. Why? Because of <a href="http://www.dubli.com/" title="dubli.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.dubli.com/</a> [dubli.com] More and more people are hearing about this year on year, and few people are going back to eBay once they've had the DubLi experience. Think about it: eBay used to be all about the auctions, now it's more about buy this now and the general marketplace. Anyway, go give DubLi a shot - you won't regret it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Soon eBay 's going to be old hat , a tarnished brand .
Why ? Because of http : //www.dubli.com/ [ dubli.com ] More and more people are hearing about this year on year , and few people are going back to eBay once they 've had the DubLi experience .
Think about it : eBay used to be all about the auctions , now it 's more about buy this now and the general marketplace .
Anyway , go give DubLi a shot - you wo n't regret it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soon eBay's going to be old hat, a tarnished brand.
Why? Because of http://www.dubli.com/ [dubli.com] More and more people are hearing about this year on year, and few people are going back to eBay once they've had the DubLi experience.
Think about it: eBay used to be all about the auctions, now it's more about buy this now and the general marketplace.
Anyway, go give DubLi a shot - you won't regret it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610422</id>
	<title>Another personal anecdote or 3</title>
	<author>NotSoHeavyD3</author>
	<datestamp>1262257920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lets see, I bought an HP printer that had an option to tell it to print B/W only. (Using the B/W cartridge.) The option didn't work. (Pain in the ass since the vast majority of the time I was printing B/W and I didn't want to waste ink on printing color. The only way to stop it was to pull out the color cartridge.) Also the driver for it was so bad I once wasted an hour trying to figure out why I couldn't print on one machine but could on another. (Answer I had to set up the guest account on one of the machines because of network security. However the error didn't indicate why it wasn't printing. I got the useless "Printing failed" so I checked to see if I could print on the other PC and went from there.) Oh, my brother got a "great" hp camera years ago. It uses compact flash, too bad it has problems with CF larger than 32MB. (My bro also had a Kodak camera that also uses CF and is older. It had no problem with a 4GB CF.) God HP sucks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets see , I bought an HP printer that had an option to tell it to print B/W only .
( Using the B/W cartridge .
) The option did n't work .
( Pain in the ass since the vast majority of the time I was printing B/W and I did n't want to waste ink on printing color .
The only way to stop it was to pull out the color cartridge .
) Also the driver for it was so bad I once wasted an hour trying to figure out why I could n't print on one machine but could on another .
( Answer I had to set up the guest account on one of the machines because of network security .
However the error did n't indicate why it was n't printing .
I got the useless " Printing failed " so I checked to see if I could print on the other PC and went from there .
) Oh , my brother got a " great " hp camera years ago .
It uses compact flash , too bad it has problems with CF larger than 32MB .
( My bro also had a Kodak camera that also uses CF and is older .
It had no problem with a 4GB CF .
) God HP sucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets see, I bought an HP printer that had an option to tell it to print B/W only.
(Using the B/W cartridge.
) The option didn't work.
(Pain in the ass since the vast majority of the time I was printing B/W and I didn't want to waste ink on printing color.
The only way to stop it was to pull out the color cartridge.
) Also the driver for it was so bad I once wasted an hour trying to figure out why I couldn't print on one machine but could on another.
(Answer I had to set up the guest account on one of the machines because of network security.
However the error didn't indicate why it wasn't printing.
I got the useless "Printing failed" so I checked to see if I could print on the other PC and went from there.
) Oh, my brother got a "great" hp camera years ago.
It uses compact flash, too bad it has problems with CF larger than 32MB.
(My bro also had a Kodak camera that also uses CF and is older.
It had no problem with a 4GB CF.
) God HP sucks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612764</id>
	<title>The Shack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262288940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, how about Radio Shack? Can you even get parts there anymore?</p></div><p>Yes. I live in Minnesota, I've been to half a dozen of their stores. The closest two both sell passive components, and ICs. A surprising amount of good things are still hiding in the dark corners.</p><p>It was only two years ago I bought a circuit board etching kit from them, which was my first exposure to it. They sell Ferric Chloride, somehow without being sued by the mothers of the world. I've also seen a kit there for learning about microcontrollers. They've got generic power supplies, power resistors, solder, electrical tape, good tools and wire suitable for breadboarding, and the desoldering iron I've used over the past decade (still the same one, oddly).</p><p>And for icing on the cake: A cute gal working there was really interested in me (geekese:thought I was sexy) for buying a bunch of Timer ICs and 10W power resistors. Opportunities to impress women, are priceless.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , how about Radio Shack ?
Can you even get parts there anymore ? Yes .
I live in Minnesota , I 've been to half a dozen of their stores .
The closest two both sell passive components , and ICs .
A surprising amount of good things are still hiding in the dark corners.It was only two years ago I bought a circuit board etching kit from them , which was my first exposure to it .
They sell Ferric Chloride , somehow without being sued by the mothers of the world .
I 've also seen a kit there for learning about microcontrollers .
They 've got generic power supplies , power resistors , solder , electrical tape , good tools and wire suitable for breadboarding , and the desoldering iron I 've used over the past decade ( still the same one , oddly ) .And for icing on the cake : A cute gal working there was really interested in me ( geekese : thought I was sexy ) for buying a bunch of Timer ICs and 10W power resistors .
Opportunities to impress women , are priceless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, how about Radio Shack?
Can you even get parts there anymore?Yes.
I live in Minnesota, I've been to half a dozen of their stores.
The closest two both sell passive components, and ICs.
A surprising amount of good things are still hiding in the dark corners.It was only two years ago I bought a circuit board etching kit from them, which was my first exposure to it.
They sell Ferric Chloride, somehow without being sued by the mothers of the world.
I've also seen a kit there for learning about microcontrollers.
They've got generic power supplies, power resistors, solder, electrical tape, good tools and wire suitable for breadboarding, and the desoldering iron I've used over the past decade (still the same one, oddly).And for icing on the cake: A cute gal working there was really interested in me (geekese:thought I was sexy) for buying a bunch of Timer ICs and 10W power resistors.
Opportunities to impress women, are priceless.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610224</id>
	<title>Re:How about Tektronix?</title>
	<author>compro01</author>
	<datestamp>1262256720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, they still make stuff, most of the equipment in my college's electronics labs is Techtronix, though the quality seems to be going downhill since they started outsourcing the manufacturing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , they still make stuff , most of the equipment in my college 's electronics labs is Techtronix , though the quality seems to be going downhill since they started outsourcing the manufacturing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, they still make stuff, most of the equipment in my college's electronics labs is Techtronix, though the quality seems to be going downhill since they started outsourcing the manufacturing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610132</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>Tromeo</author>
	<datestamp>1262256060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first things that come to my mind are:</p><p>1) RPN calculators (I miss them so)<br>2) scientific instruments (GC, GC/MS, etc)<br>3) HP/UX</p><p>They don't make the calculators anymore and spun the scientific gear off into Agilent before the dot com bust.  HP/UX is still kicking but getting less relevant every year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first things that come to my mind are : 1 ) RPN calculators ( I miss them so ) 2 ) scientific instruments ( GC , GC/MS , etc ) 3 ) HP/UXThey do n't make the calculators anymore and spun the scientific gear off into Agilent before the dot com bust .
HP/UX is still kicking but getting less relevant every year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first things that come to my mind are:1) RPN calculators (I miss them so)2) scientific instruments (GC, GC/MS, etc)3) HP/UXThey don't make the calculators anymore and spun the scientific gear off into Agilent before the dot com bust.
HP/UX is still kicking but getting less relevant every year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609966</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>bigbigbison</author>
	<datestamp>1262255100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>HP got rid of a lot of that when they spun off Agilent. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agilent" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agilent</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>HP got rid of a lot of that when they spun off Agilent .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agilent [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HP got rid of a lot of that when they spun off Agilent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agilent [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609860</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Shack</title>
	<author>tautog</author>
	<datestamp>1262254440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny Radio Shack story - stopped into the local store a few years ago to pick up some random connectors, etc. Before offering to help me find what I needed, was offered a cell phone and then informed that they have to special order everything on my list. I asked them what they DO offer and was basically told cell phones and a few cables.</p><p>My response: "So you're essentially a more expensive and less useful version of Best Buy?".</p><p>The guy gave me a foul look and I turned on my heel and left.</p><p>For the record, I worked at Radio Shack for a year or so way back when. You were required to take and pass training courses (on basic electrical theory and how to identify and match components such as resistors, capactors, etc) and failure to do so meant termination.</p><p>I refuse to even enter their stores anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny Radio Shack story - stopped into the local store a few years ago to pick up some random connectors , etc .
Before offering to help me find what I needed , was offered a cell phone and then informed that they have to special order everything on my list .
I asked them what they DO offer and was basically told cell phones and a few cables.My response : " So you 're essentially a more expensive and less useful version of Best Buy ?
" .The guy gave me a foul look and I turned on my heel and left.For the record , I worked at Radio Shack for a year or so way back when .
You were required to take and pass training courses ( on basic electrical theory and how to identify and match components such as resistors , capactors , etc ) and failure to do so meant termination.I refuse to even enter their stores anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny Radio Shack story - stopped into the local store a few years ago to pick up some random connectors, etc.
Before offering to help me find what I needed, was offered a cell phone and then informed that they have to special order everything on my list.
I asked them what they DO offer and was basically told cell phones and a few cables.My response: "So you're essentially a more expensive and less useful version of Best Buy?
".The guy gave me a foul look and I turned on my heel and left.For the record, I worked at Radio Shack for a year or so way back when.
You were required to take and pass training courses (on basic electrical theory and how to identify and match components such as resistors, capactors, etc) and failure to do so meant termination.I refuse to even enter their stores anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30621280</id>
	<title>Re:Old modems</title>
	<author>mrmeval</author>
	<datestamp>1230899580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Radio Shack should be on it. They gutted their hobbyists section and became a toy store. Now with the rise of the techno-artists they have a meager selection of parts with no logic behind them and 35 dollar laser pointers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Radio Shack should be on it .
They gutted their hobbyists section and became a toy store .
Now with the rise of the techno-artists they have a meager selection of parts with no logic behind them and 35 dollar laser pointers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Radio Shack should be on it.
They gutted their hobbyists section and became a toy store.
Now with the rise of the techno-artists they have a meager selection of parts with no logic behind them and 35 dollar laser pointers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612956</id>
	<title>What is the common theme behind decline?</title>
	<author>beachdog</author>
	<datestamp>1230803520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have been reading the posts trying to figure out why so many of these iconic technical-industrial organizations have slid.</p><p>Most of the posts associate the decline of organizations with a change of management. The management stories tell similar tales: where there is a replacement of management, the decline is expressed as selling off low performing assets and re-organizing to reduce costs.</p><p>Most of this discussion doesn't dwell on the massive de-industrialization of the USA. Around 1980, factories in the Far East were making electronic assemblies for less than the price of the American parts and American labor in a Heathkit kit.</p><p>But with the shift to tech manufacturing in the far East, did American corporations lose control of the products they made?</p><p>Here is a question; Have Apple and Hewlett-Packard done something different with their manufacturing organization? Do Apple and H-P own offshore factories in a way that enables them to prevent their proprietary products from being copied by others? Do these two companies retain a manufacturing control that prevents them from becoming a rented out brand like Bell &amp; Howell?</p><p>I know from anecdote that the 80's era computer maker Morrow had great difficulty with it's computer mother board. The board was engineered in Silicon Valley and the Japanese board maker either sent no boards or way way too many. The result was first Morrow had trouble meeting demand, then it had too many boards as the market changed. Morrow  went out of business around 1983 leaving behind a warehouse of unsold components that became one of Oakland's best computer surplus stores for several years afterward.</p><p>Robert Samuelson's The Great Inflation and It's Aftermath sort of tells the story of the decline of American manufacturing. The USA and Canada exited World War II with their manufacturing plants intact. By the end of the Regan Presidency, the de-industrialization of America was a sideshow mixed in with high interest rates and the second energy crisis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been reading the posts trying to figure out why so many of these iconic technical-industrial organizations have slid.Most of the posts associate the decline of organizations with a change of management .
The management stories tell similar tales : where there is a replacement of management , the decline is expressed as selling off low performing assets and re-organizing to reduce costs.Most of this discussion does n't dwell on the massive de-industrialization of the USA .
Around 1980 , factories in the Far East were making electronic assemblies for less than the price of the American parts and American labor in a Heathkit kit.But with the shift to tech manufacturing in the far East , did American corporations lose control of the products they made ? Here is a question ; Have Apple and Hewlett-Packard done something different with their manufacturing organization ?
Do Apple and H-P own offshore factories in a way that enables them to prevent their proprietary products from being copied by others ?
Do these two companies retain a manufacturing control that prevents them from becoming a rented out brand like Bell &amp; Howell ? I know from anecdote that the 80 's era computer maker Morrow had great difficulty with it 's computer mother board .
The board was engineered in Silicon Valley and the Japanese board maker either sent no boards or way way too many .
The result was first Morrow had trouble meeting demand , then it had too many boards as the market changed .
Morrow went out of business around 1983 leaving behind a warehouse of unsold components that became one of Oakland 's best computer surplus stores for several years afterward.Robert Samuelson 's The Great Inflation and It 's Aftermath sort of tells the story of the decline of American manufacturing .
The USA and Canada exited World War II with their manufacturing plants intact .
By the end of the Regan Presidency , the de-industrialization of America was a sideshow mixed in with high interest rates and the second energy crisis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been reading the posts trying to figure out why so many of these iconic technical-industrial organizations have slid.Most of the posts associate the decline of organizations with a change of management.
The management stories tell similar tales: where there is a replacement of management, the decline is expressed as selling off low performing assets and re-organizing to reduce costs.Most of this discussion doesn't dwell on the massive de-industrialization of the USA.
Around 1980, factories in the Far East were making electronic assemblies for less than the price of the American parts and American labor in a Heathkit kit.But with the shift to tech manufacturing in the far East, did American corporations lose control of the products they made?Here is a question; Have Apple and Hewlett-Packard done something different with their manufacturing organization?
Do Apple and H-P own offshore factories in a way that enables them to prevent their proprietary products from being copied by others?
Do these two companies retain a manufacturing control that prevents them from becoming a rented out brand like Bell &amp; Howell?I know from anecdote that the 80's era computer maker Morrow had great difficulty with it's computer mother board.
The board was engineered in Silicon Valley and the Japanese board maker either sent no boards or way way too many.
The result was first Morrow had trouble meeting demand, then it had too many boards as the market changed.
Morrow  went out of business around 1983 leaving behind a warehouse of unsold components that became one of Oakland's best computer surplus stores for several years afterward.Robert Samuelson's The Great Inflation and It's Aftermath sort of tells the story of the decline of American manufacturing.
The USA and Canada exited World War II with their manufacturing plants intact.
By the end of the Regan Presidency, the de-industrialization of America was a sideshow mixed in with high interest rates and the second energy crisis.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612774</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1262289240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Stockholders always lean towards the likes of Carly Florina, for the reasons already described - short-term profits."
Yea, I remember reading about the HP proxy fight back around 2001, and it is old news by now. The problem is how to finally fix it properly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Stockholders always lean towards the likes of Carly Florina , for the reasons already described - short-term profits .
" Yea , I remember reading about the HP proxy fight back around 2001 , and it is old news by now .
The problem is how to finally fix it properly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Stockholders always lean towards the likes of Carly Florina, for the reasons already described - short-term profits.
"
Yea, I remember reading about the HP proxy fight back around 2001, and it is old news by now.
The problem is how to finally fix it properly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609782</id>
	<title>Re:Old modems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262253900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also Borland. Many programmer out there like me cut their teeth using Borland Pascal/C/C++.... then we went thru a brief optimism with Delphi... then the insane Inprise name change... then a long spiral into insignificance. RIP Borland.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also Borland .
Many programmer out there like me cut their teeth using Borland Pascal/C/C + + .... then we went thru a brief optimism with Delphi... then the insane Inprise name change... then a long spiral into insignificance .
RIP Borland .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also Borland.
Many programmer out there like me cut their teeth using Borland Pascal/C/C++.... then we went thru a brief optimism with Delphi... then the insane Inprise name change... then a long spiral into insignificance.
RIP Borland.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609884</id>
	<title>Re:reverse effect?</title>
	<author>omnichad</author>
	<datestamp>1262254620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DIVX is not even the same company as who created DivX.  How they weren't sued to oblivion, I have no idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DIVX is not even the same company as who created DivX .
How they were n't sued to oblivion , I have no idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DIVX is not even the same company as who created DivX.
How they weren't sued to oblivion, I have no idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612102</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1262276280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Primarily, Slashdot profile has vastly shifted towards Law&amp;Freedom in the tech world. Way less raw tech news, way fewer articles on new devices, new tech, new software and so on. Instead, it has a lot of articles on "Your Rights Online", censorship, politics affecting the net, the war of RIAA vs pirates, freedom of speech and violations against it and so on. It is an excellent news source if this is what interests you, and I visit slashdot precisely for these stories. Devices? Gizmodo and Engadget. DIY - MAKE Blog (though it's not quite as ambitious and a bit too commercialized for my liking.) Kotaku for games too. I'd like to find a good site on news in the software field too, and something with good science news - for now Slashdot fulfills these two roles adequately but not optimally.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Primarily , Slashdot profile has vastly shifted towards Law&amp;Freedom in the tech world .
Way less raw tech news , way fewer articles on new devices , new tech , new software and so on .
Instead , it has a lot of articles on " Your Rights Online " , censorship , politics affecting the net , the war of RIAA vs pirates , freedom of speech and violations against it and so on .
It is an excellent news source if this is what interests you , and I visit slashdot precisely for these stories .
Devices ? Gizmodo and Engadget .
DIY - MAKE Blog ( though it 's not quite as ambitious and a bit too commercialized for my liking .
) Kotaku for games too .
I 'd like to find a good site on news in the software field too , and something with good science news - for now Slashdot fulfills these two roles adequately but not optimally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Primarily, Slashdot profile has vastly shifted towards Law&amp;Freedom in the tech world.
Way less raw tech news, way fewer articles on new devices, new tech, new software and so on.
Instead, it has a lot of articles on "Your Rights Online", censorship, politics affecting the net, the war of RIAA vs pirates, freedom of speech and violations against it and so on.
It is an excellent news source if this is what interests you, and I visit slashdot precisely for these stories.
Devices? Gizmodo and Engadget.
DIY - MAKE Blog (though it's not quite as ambitious and a bit too commercialized for my liking.
) Kotaku for games too.
I'd like to find a good site on news in the software field too, and something with good science news - for now Slashdot fulfills these two roles adequately but not optimally.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610532</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262258880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed.  Slashdot has changed from largely tech reporting (not just IT, but space, science, etc. etc.), to more and more political reporting (not just national politics, but IT politics) and outright religious reporting (Linux, Apple, Google).<br>
&nbsp; <br>Columbine, 9/11, and Groklaw changed Slashdot irrevocably.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed .
Slashdot has changed from largely tech reporting ( not just IT , but space , science , etc .
etc. ) , to more and more political reporting ( not just national politics , but IT politics ) and outright religious reporting ( Linux , Apple , Google ) .
  Columbine , 9/11 , and Groklaw changed Slashdot irrevocably .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed.
Slashdot has changed from largely tech reporting (not just IT, but space, science, etc.
etc.), to more and more political reporting (not just national politics, but IT politics) and outright religious reporting (Linux, Apple, Google).
  Columbine, 9/11, and Groklaw changed Slashdot irrevocably.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610074</id>
	<title>Adobe</title>
	<author>moosesocks</author>
	<datestamp>1262255580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Might not quite be there yet, but it's well on its way.</p><p>From the abominable performance/security of the Flash player to the ever-increasing bloat of Photoshop, Adobe's users are pretty much fed up with the company.</p><p>At one point, it would have been heresy to criticize Photoshop.  Now the design community is practically screaming for a replacement.    (It's twice as bad if you're a mac user.  Nobody's quite sure what prompted the Apple/Adobe divorce, but it's been <a href="http://mrgan.tumblr.com/post/235455865/the-many-sliders-of-photoshop-cs4" title="tumblr.com">ugly</a> [tumblr.com])</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Might not quite be there yet , but it 's well on its way.From the abominable performance/security of the Flash player to the ever-increasing bloat of Photoshop , Adobe 's users are pretty much fed up with the company.At one point , it would have been heresy to criticize Photoshop .
Now the design community is practically screaming for a replacement .
( It 's twice as bad if you 're a mac user .
Nobody 's quite sure what prompted the Apple/Adobe divorce , but it 's been ugly [ tumblr.com ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Might not quite be there yet, but it's well on its way.From the abominable performance/security of the Flash player to the ever-increasing bloat of Photoshop, Adobe's users are pretty much fed up with the company.At one point, it would have been heresy to criticize Photoshop.
Now the design community is practically screaming for a replacement.
(It's twice as bad if you're a mac user.
Nobody's quite sure what prompted the Apple/Adobe divorce, but it's been ugly [tumblr.com])</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609544</id>
	<title>AltaVista?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262252580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not faded yet. At least there I don't get those annoying sorry pages (yet) I get from Google.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not faded yet .
At least there I do n't get those annoying sorry pages ( yet ) I get from Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not faded yet.
At least there I don't get those annoying sorry pages (yet) I get from Google.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646</id>
	<title>Radio Shack</title>
	<author>mdsolar</author>
	<datestamp>1262253180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Junk products and won't honor extended warranties they sell.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Junk products and wo n't honor extended warranties they sell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Junk products and won't honor extended warranties they sell.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488</id>
	<title>HP didn't make the list?</title>
	<author>Ihlosi</author>
	<datestamp>1262252280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Odd. They lost the HP way a long time ago.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Odd .
They lost the HP way a long time ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Odd.
They lost the HP way a long time ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610648</id>
	<title>Re:Packard Bell for the WIN!</title>
	<author>innocent\_white\_lamb</author>
	<datestamp>1262259840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Packard Bell is the only computer that I can honestly say I once used a hammer and cold chisel to fix.<br>
&nbsp; <br>A client wanted to install a CD drive in his PB and while the plastic case had an extra drive slot, the metal frame had a spot-welded plate covering the bay, for reasons unknown to me.  The drive worked fine once it was installed, but I remember hoping the computer's owner didn't come in while I was beating that plate off.  His reaction would probably not have been positive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Packard Bell is the only computer that I can honestly say I once used a hammer and cold chisel to fix .
  A client wanted to install a CD drive in his PB and while the plastic case had an extra drive slot , the metal frame had a spot-welded plate covering the bay , for reasons unknown to me .
The drive worked fine once it was installed , but I remember hoping the computer 's owner did n't come in while I was beating that plate off .
His reaction would probably not have been positive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Packard Bell is the only computer that I can honestly say I once used a hammer and cold chisel to fix.
  A client wanted to install a CD drive in his PB and while the plastic case had an extra drive slot, the metal frame had a spot-welded plate covering the bay, for reasons unknown to me.
The drive worked fine once it was installed, but I remember hoping the computer's owner didn't come in while I was beating that plate off.
His reaction would probably not have been positive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610388</id>
	<title>Re:Old modems</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1262257680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wouldn't really say they're tarnished. They're still around and while their stock prices have seen better days, they're not at their worst point and on the rise so it's certainly in better shape than most everyone on that list.
<br> <br>
<a href="http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=COMS#chart7:symbol=coms;range=my;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined" title="yahoo.com">http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=COMS#chart7:symbol=coms;range=my;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined</a> [yahoo.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't really say they 're tarnished .
They 're still around and while their stock prices have seen better days , they 're not at their worst point and on the rise so it 's certainly in better shape than most everyone on that list .
http : //uk.finance.yahoo.com/echarts ? s = COMS # chart7 : symbol = coms ; range = my ; indicator = volume ; charttype = line ; crosshair = on ; ohlcvalues = 0 ; logscale = on ; source = undefined [ yahoo.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't really say they're tarnished.
They're still around and while their stock prices have seen better days, they're not at their worst point and on the rise so it's certainly in better shape than most everyone on that list.
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=COMS#chart7:symbol=coms;range=my;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined [yahoo.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610850</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>Lehk228</author>
	<datestamp>1262261760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>slashdot has gotten better over the years.<br> <br>do you know how long it's been since i came across one of the old demographics surveys that used to get posted.  Though i never quite understood the imporance of knowing if i was homosexual or african american, and the pollsters always used such crude language.</htmltext>
<tokenext>slashdot has gotten better over the years .
do you know how long it 's been since i came across one of the old demographics surveys that used to get posted .
Though i never quite understood the imporance of knowing if i was homosexual or african american , and the pollsters always used such crude language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>slashdot has gotten better over the years.
do you know how long it's been since i came across one of the old demographics surveys that used to get posted.
Though i never quite understood the imporance of knowing if i was homosexual or african american, and the pollsters always used such crude language.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612828</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>AK Marc</author>
	<datestamp>1230801540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I think most people would blame Carly Fiorina.</i> <br> <br>I think she makes a great scape goat.  Just like Michael Brown for New Orleans, she did the job she was hired for.  She was one in a line of business leaders of a tech company, until it was no longer a tech company.  She may have been better at that job, that that was what she was *supposed* to do.  Just like Michael Brown was not any good at federal emergency management.  Lots of others made mistakes too, but he was the one that was trapped in the middle.  The Board of Directors tanked HP.  They set the tone.  They hired Carly, knowing what she'd do.  Just like DHS was in charge of FEMA, and if FEMA dropped the ball DHS should have stepped in, and never did.  Brown was sacrificed so that no one could ever speak ill of DHS, since they are supposedly the ones that keep us safe.  And no one talks about the board being the ones that set the tone before and after Carly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think most people would blame Carly Fiorina .
I think she makes a great scape goat .
Just like Michael Brown for New Orleans , she did the job she was hired for .
She was one in a line of business leaders of a tech company , until it was no longer a tech company .
She may have been better at that job , that that was what she was * supposed * to do .
Just like Michael Brown was not any good at federal emergency management .
Lots of others made mistakes too , but he was the one that was trapped in the middle .
The Board of Directors tanked HP .
They set the tone .
They hired Carly , knowing what she 'd do .
Just like DHS was in charge of FEMA , and if FEMA dropped the ball DHS should have stepped in , and never did .
Brown was sacrificed so that no one could ever speak ill of DHS , since they are supposedly the ones that keep us safe .
And no one talks about the board being the ones that set the tone before and after Carly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think most people would blame Carly Fiorina.
I think she makes a great scape goat.
Just like Michael Brown for New Orleans, she did the job she was hired for.
She was one in a line of business leaders of a tech company, until it was no longer a tech company.
She may have been better at that job, that that was what she was *supposed* to do.
Just like Michael Brown was not any good at federal emergency management.
Lots of others made mistakes too, but he was the one that was trapped in the middle.
The Board of Directors tanked HP.
They set the tone.
They hired Carly, knowing what she'd do.
Just like DHS was in charge of FEMA, and if FEMA dropped the ball DHS should have stepped in, and never did.
Brown was sacrificed so that no one could ever speak ill of DHS, since they are supposedly the ones that keep us safe.
And no one talks about the board being the ones that set the tone before and after Carly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554</id>
	<title>Packard Bell for the WIN!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262252640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have never seen such a craptastic computer maker than Packard Bell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have never seen such a craptastic computer maker than Packard Bell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have never seen such a craptastic computer maker than Packard Bell.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610370</id>
	<title>Re:digital</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262257620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A series of management by accountants slowly dissolved the company into take over bait.</p></div><p>Don't know about that, I thought it was their missing the boat for the PC market.</p><p>We could all be running Alphas instead of Intel if digital was on the ball.</p><p>What about Wang? A legend in computing until nepotism killed it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A series of management by accountants slowly dissolved the company into take over bait.Do n't know about that , I thought it was their missing the boat for the PC market.We could all be running Alphas instead of Intel if digital was on the ball.What about Wang ?
A legend in computing until nepotism killed it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A series of management by accountants slowly dissolved the company into take over bait.Don't know about that, I thought it was their missing the boat for the PC market.We could all be running Alphas instead of Intel if digital was on the ball.What about Wang?
A legend in computing until nepotism killed it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610450</id>
	<title>2 from the gaming world</title>
	<author>NotSoHeavyD3</author>
	<datestamp>1262258100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would be Atari and Sega. Atari used to be the biggest video game company in the world, sold tens of millions 2600's and had billions in sales at the beginning of the 80's. I wonder how many current gamers would believe me if I told them that. (Since they're just a label now. As for Sega, they used to make systems and while they might have not been the most popular they're not the joke they are today. (I mean Sonic, how badly did they screw up Sonic? Of course sometimes they do something right by mistake but you know it'll only be a moment before they mess up something else.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would be Atari and Sega .
Atari used to be the biggest video game company in the world , sold tens of millions 2600 's and had billions in sales at the beginning of the 80 's .
I wonder how many current gamers would believe me if I told them that .
( Since they 're just a label now .
As for Sega , they used to make systems and while they might have not been the most popular they 're not the joke they are today .
( I mean Sonic , how badly did they screw up Sonic ?
Of course sometimes they do something right by mistake but you know it 'll only be a moment before they mess up something else .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would be Atari and Sega.
Atari used to be the biggest video game company in the world, sold tens of millions 2600's and had billions in sales at the beginning of the 80's.
I wonder how many current gamers would believe me if I told them that.
(Since they're just a label now.
As for Sega, they used to make systems and while they might have not been the most popular they're not the joke they are today.
(I mean Sonic, how badly did they screw up Sonic?
Of course sometimes they do something right by mistake but you know it'll only be a moment before they mess up something else.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609756</id>
	<title>Re:Here's Another</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262253780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What about Slashdot?  It's been passed around like an intern's ass at the geek compound.  Andover.net, va research, va linux, va systems, sourceforge, and now geek.net.  And I haven't even mentioned the pt cruiser.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What about Slashdot ?
It 's been passed around like an intern 's ass at the geek compound .
Andover.net , va research , va linux , va systems , sourceforge , and now geek.net .
And I have n't even mentioned the pt cruiser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about Slashdot?
It's been passed around like an intern's ass at the geek compound.
Andover.net, va research, va linux, va systems, sourceforge, and now geek.net.
And I haven't even mentioned the pt cruiser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611598</id>
	<title>Re:SCO</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1262269020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The difference is that SCO was obviously turned into a weapon with no concern for its viability as anything else.</p><p>SCO didn't try to succeed on merit and fail, and is merely the corporate equivalent of an exploded land mine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The difference is that SCO was obviously turned into a weapon with no concern for its viability as anything else.SCO did n't try to succeed on merit and fail , and is merely the corporate equivalent of an exploded land mine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The difference is that SCO was obviously turned into a weapon with no concern for its viability as anything else.SCO didn't try to succeed on merit and fail, and is merely the corporate equivalent of an exploded land mine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609832</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>cinnamon colbert</author>
	<datestamp>1262254320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The 1st thing that comes to my mind is electronic test equipment (VOMs, signal generators) where HP stands for High Priced</htmltext>
<tokenext>The 1st thing that comes to my mind is electronic test equipment ( VOMs , signal generators ) where HP stands for High Priced</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 1st thing that comes to my mind is electronic test equipment (VOMs, signal generators) where HP stands for High Priced</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613510</id>
	<title>Gottlieb and Williams, the pinball machine makers</title>
	<author>mbstone</author>
	<datestamp>1230817200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If any former OEMs deserve to be called "most tarnished," it's these two.  The pinball machine in your local bar, movie theater or bowling alley is probably tarnished to the point where it's all but unplayable, because most pinball machine operators never clean them....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If any former OEMs deserve to be called " most tarnished , " it 's these two .
The pinball machine in your local bar , movie theater or bowling alley is probably tarnished to the point where it 's all but unplayable , because most pinball machine operators never clean them... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If any former OEMs deserve to be called "most tarnished," it's these two.
The pinball machine in your local bar, movie theater or bowling alley is probably tarnished to the point where it's all but unplayable, because most pinball machine operators never clean them....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610326</id>
	<title>Re:IMAX seems to be slipping also</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262257380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>If we're going to get into the film brands, no conversation is complete without a mention of Lucasfilm THX.  Originally conceived as a quality-control system for movie sound, and having very strict technical requirements in the theater; George fired the inventor in the 90s and now they just slap the plaque on any theater that can write the check for the $100,000 licensing fee, and the THX name is stuck on cellphones and car stereos.  Puke.
<p>
And don't get me started on Dolby.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If we 're going to get into the film brands , no conversation is complete without a mention of Lucasfilm THX .
Originally conceived as a quality-control system for movie sound , and having very strict technical requirements in the theater ; George fired the inventor in the 90s and now they just slap the plaque on any theater that can write the check for the $ 100,000 licensing fee , and the THX name is stuck on cellphones and car stereos .
Puke . And do n't get me started on Dolby .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we're going to get into the film brands, no conversation is complete without a mention of Lucasfilm THX.
Originally conceived as a quality-control system for movie sound, and having very strict technical requirements in the theater; George fired the inventor in the 90s and now they just slap the plaque on any theater that can write the check for the $100,000 licensing fee, and the THX name is stuck on cellphones and car stereos.
Puke.

And don't get me started on Dolby.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610802</id>
	<title>Packard-Bell</title>
	<author>BitwizeGHC</author>
	<datestamp>1262261280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Packard-Bell was bought by Acer it may have a shot at redemption. Acer makes good kit. I reluctantly, queasily bought my sister an eMachines PC for Christmas, only to find out that while not specced at the top of the line, it is a solidly built piece of equipment nearly identical, in some respects, to certain Acer machines. Turns out eMachines was acquired by Gateway was acquired by Acer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Packard-Bell was bought by Acer it may have a shot at redemption .
Acer makes good kit .
I reluctantly , queasily bought my sister an eMachines PC for Christmas , only to find out that while not specced at the top of the line , it is a solidly built piece of equipment nearly identical , in some respects , to certain Acer machines .
Turns out eMachines was acquired by Gateway was acquired by Acer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Packard-Bell was bought by Acer it may have a shot at redemption.
Acer makes good kit.
I reluctantly, queasily bought my sister an eMachines PC for Christmas, only to find out that while not specced at the top of the line, it is a solidly built piece of equipment nearly identical, in some respects, to certain Acer machines.
Turns out eMachines was acquired by Gateway was acquired by Acer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610194</id>
	<title>Re:Old modems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262256480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>then we went thru a brief optimism with Delphi...</p> </div><p>...to which Borland replied, "I don't think so, Tim."</p><p>Oh wait, that's the wrong Borland. My bad.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>then we went thru a brief optimism with Delphi... ...to which Borland replied , " I do n't think so , Tim .
" Oh wait , that 's the wrong Borland .
My bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then we went thru a brief optimism with Delphi... ...to which Borland replied, "I don't think so, Tim.
"Oh wait, that's the wrong Borland.
My bad.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611828</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished</title>
	<author>tenton</author>
	<datestamp>1262272080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Polaroid? Maybe you haven't seen the whoring out of their brand name; I recall CD burners and silly electronics brandished with their name.</p><p>Take a closer look at that list, they're all pretty much companies that aren't the original company anymore, at least when it comes to the use of their brand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Polaroid ?
Maybe you have n't seen the whoring out of their brand name ; I recall CD burners and silly electronics brandished with their name.Take a closer look at that list , they 're all pretty much companies that are n't the original company anymore , at least when it comes to the use of their brand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Polaroid?
Maybe you haven't seen the whoring out of their brand name; I recall CD burners and silly electronics brandished with their name.Take a closer look at that list, they're all pretty much companies that aren't the original company anymore, at least when it comes to the use of their brand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609664</id>
	<title>IMAX seems to be slipping also</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262253300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It used to stand unambiguously for large-format filming (49 x 70 mm per frame), projected on large screens (around 53 x 72 ft). There were some variations, like the projection on a concave screen of OmniMAX (now IMAX Dome), but the general brand made sense. IMAX meant high-resolution film, projected on large screens.</p><p>But for presumably commercial reasons related to a deal with theatre chain AMC, a large portion of theatres currently advertising "IMAX" films are actually projecting "IMAX Digital", a not-very-closely-related digital projection format. Film v. digital in theory I don't care much about, but the entire brand of IMAX=big is dispensed with with IMAX Digital's much smaller 28x58-ft screens. The digital projectors (dual 2K resolution projectors) also don't seem to be of sufficient resolution to match the quality of a 49x70mm film projector. As a result, it's not clear IMAX means a lot as a brand anymore, since any given theatre might well have a mostly normal sized screen and a not particularly high-resolution projector.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It used to stand unambiguously for large-format filming ( 49 x 70 mm per frame ) , projected on large screens ( around 53 x 72 ft ) .
There were some variations , like the projection on a concave screen of OmniMAX ( now IMAX Dome ) , but the general brand made sense .
IMAX meant high-resolution film , projected on large screens.But for presumably commercial reasons related to a deal with theatre chain AMC , a large portion of theatres currently advertising " IMAX " films are actually projecting " IMAX Digital " , a not-very-closely-related digital projection format .
Film v. digital in theory I do n't care much about , but the entire brand of IMAX = big is dispensed with with IMAX Digital 's much smaller 28x58-ft screens .
The digital projectors ( dual 2K resolution projectors ) also do n't seem to be of sufficient resolution to match the quality of a 49x70mm film projector .
As a result , it 's not clear IMAX means a lot as a brand anymore , since any given theatre might well have a mostly normal sized screen and a not particularly high-resolution projector .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It used to stand unambiguously for large-format filming (49 x 70 mm per frame), projected on large screens (around 53 x 72 ft).
There were some variations, like the projection on a concave screen of OmniMAX (now IMAX Dome), but the general brand made sense.
IMAX meant high-resolution film, projected on large screens.But for presumably commercial reasons related to a deal with theatre chain AMC, a large portion of theatres currently advertising "IMAX" films are actually projecting "IMAX Digital", a not-very-closely-related digital projection format.
Film v. digital in theory I don't care much about, but the entire brand of IMAX=big is dispensed with with IMAX Digital's much smaller 28x58-ft screens.
The digital projectors (dual 2K resolution projectors) also don't seem to be of sufficient resolution to match the quality of a 49x70mm film projector.
As a result, it's not clear IMAX means a lot as a brand anymore, since any given theatre might well have a mostly normal sized screen and a not particularly high-resolution projector.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610272</id>
	<title>SCO</title>
	<author>nattt</author>
	<datestamp>1262257080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>surely SCO is the most tarnished?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>surely SCO is the most tarnished ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>surely SCO is the most tarnished?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612062</id>
	<title>Want a cell phone with that?</title>
	<author>mrscott</author>
	<datestamp>1262275500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I live in a small town, but well remember the days when Radio Shack used to sell useful stuff.  I'm still forced to go there sometimes when I need a mouse or something, but hate going in now.  I went in a few weeks ago and the district manager was there and was way too aggressive.  I was looking for a USB cable, so she naturally told me I needed an iPhone.  I told her that I already had an iPhone so she told me that I should switch it to Radio Shack.  I told her that my college (where I work and happen to handle the cell phone contracts) owns the phone and the plan.  This was where she sat there and badgered me trying to get me to move all of the college's phones to Radio Shack, called the store manager over and ordered him to grill me further.  Now, every time I walk in the store, the sales droid asks when he can expect that cell phone contract to be changed.  I keep telling them that it isn't going to happen - right now, we get a 20\% discount, can order through AT&amp;T premier at any time and the sales people I work with are actually good... sure, I'll switch to Radio Shack where I have to drive to the store hoping that they are open).

So, this is a long rant... "The Shack" name change just reinforces how far the company has fallen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in a small town , but well remember the days when Radio Shack used to sell useful stuff .
I 'm still forced to go there sometimes when I need a mouse or something , but hate going in now .
I went in a few weeks ago and the district manager was there and was way too aggressive .
I was looking for a USB cable , so she naturally told me I needed an iPhone .
I told her that I already had an iPhone so she told me that I should switch it to Radio Shack .
I told her that my college ( where I work and happen to handle the cell phone contracts ) owns the phone and the plan .
This was where she sat there and badgered me trying to get me to move all of the college 's phones to Radio Shack , called the store manager over and ordered him to grill me further .
Now , every time I walk in the store , the sales droid asks when he can expect that cell phone contract to be changed .
I keep telling them that it is n't going to happen - right now , we get a 20 \ % discount , can order through AT&amp;T premier at any time and the sales people I work with are actually good... sure , I 'll switch to Radio Shack where I have to drive to the store hoping that they are open ) .
So , this is a long rant... " The Shack " name change just reinforces how far the company has fallen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in a small town, but well remember the days when Radio Shack used to sell useful stuff.
I'm still forced to go there sometimes when I need a mouse or something, but hate going in now.
I went in a few weeks ago and the district manager was there and was way too aggressive.
I was looking for a USB cable, so she naturally told me I needed an iPhone.
I told her that I already had an iPhone so she told me that I should switch it to Radio Shack.
I told her that my college (where I work and happen to handle the cell phone contracts) owns the phone and the plan.
This was where she sat there and badgered me trying to get me to move all of the college's phones to Radio Shack, called the store manager over and ordered him to grill me further.
Now, every time I walk in the store, the sales droid asks when he can expect that cell phone contract to be changed.
I keep telling them that it isn't going to happen - right now, we get a 20\% discount, can order through AT&amp;T premier at any time and the sales people I work with are actually good... sure, I'll switch to Radio Shack where I have to drive to the store hoping that they are open).
So, this is a long rant... "The Shack" name change just reinforces how far the company has fallen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611272</id>
	<title>Amiga status</title>
	<author>Orion Blastar</author>
	<datestamp>1262265840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Europe they went crazy for the Amiga. Most Amiga users are upset at Microsoft and Apple for screwing them in the past and some dual-boot AmigaOS and Yellow Dog Linux or some other PowerPC version of Linux.</p><p>If Slashdot had bothered to cover the Amiga we'd know what went wrong and what they are currently doing.</p><p>AmigaOS 4.0 was written by Hyperion or some other company and there was licensing deals. AmigaOS 5.0 was supposed to outclass and outperform Windows Vista and Mac OSX. But due to lawsuits it never got released.</p><p>The best open source project to come out of the Amiga technology is <a href="http://aros.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net">Amiga Research OS</a> [sourceforge.net] which will work on Intel X86 systems and virtual machines and has a version that runs native inside of Linux. But it lacks proper third party hardware drivers for modern systems so I'd run it in VirtualBox or some other virtual machine like HaikuOS does. AROS is AmigaOS 3.1 based on the APIs and started out as a WINE product and became a full OS.</p><p>Amiga, Inc. sells some of the classic Amiga games for Windows and mobile devices under the Amiga Anywhere titles. Some day like the C64 they will port them to the WII, PS3, and XBox 360, etc.</p><p>In an attempt to open source and modernize the Amiga and AmigaOS technology they are taking a page from Apple and making an AmigaOS merge with Linux to create <a href="http://anubis-os.org/home/" title="anubis-os.org">Anubis OS</a> [anubis-os.org] but it is not Amiga, Inc that is doing it but another group. While Mac OS X was based on NextStep (A MACH kernel *BSD Unix based OS) and the Classic MacOS series the Anubis OS claims to be Linux based with the Amiga GUI and ability to run Amiga software.</p><p>I hereby challenge Slashdot editors and readers to report on the Amiga projects as they mature and make progress. See if 2010 can be the year of the Amiga coverage at Slashdot and create an Amiga category if one doesn't already exist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Europe they went crazy for the Amiga .
Most Amiga users are upset at Microsoft and Apple for screwing them in the past and some dual-boot AmigaOS and Yellow Dog Linux or some other PowerPC version of Linux.If Slashdot had bothered to cover the Amiga we 'd know what went wrong and what they are currently doing.AmigaOS 4.0 was written by Hyperion or some other company and there was licensing deals .
AmigaOS 5.0 was supposed to outclass and outperform Windows Vista and Mac OSX .
But due to lawsuits it never got released.The best open source project to come out of the Amiga technology is Amiga Research OS [ sourceforge.net ] which will work on Intel X86 systems and virtual machines and has a version that runs native inside of Linux .
But it lacks proper third party hardware drivers for modern systems so I 'd run it in VirtualBox or some other virtual machine like HaikuOS does .
AROS is AmigaOS 3.1 based on the APIs and started out as a WINE product and became a full OS.Amiga , Inc. sells some of the classic Amiga games for Windows and mobile devices under the Amiga Anywhere titles .
Some day like the C64 they will port them to the WII , PS3 , and XBox 360 , etc.In an attempt to open source and modernize the Amiga and AmigaOS technology they are taking a page from Apple and making an AmigaOS merge with Linux to create Anubis OS [ anubis-os.org ] but it is not Amiga , Inc that is doing it but another group .
While Mac OS X was based on NextStep ( A MACH kernel * BSD Unix based OS ) and the Classic MacOS series the Anubis OS claims to be Linux based with the Amiga GUI and ability to run Amiga software.I hereby challenge Slashdot editors and readers to report on the Amiga projects as they mature and make progress .
See if 2010 can be the year of the Amiga coverage at Slashdot and create an Amiga category if one does n't already exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Europe they went crazy for the Amiga.
Most Amiga users are upset at Microsoft and Apple for screwing them in the past and some dual-boot AmigaOS and Yellow Dog Linux or some other PowerPC version of Linux.If Slashdot had bothered to cover the Amiga we'd know what went wrong and what they are currently doing.AmigaOS 4.0 was written by Hyperion or some other company and there was licensing deals.
AmigaOS 5.0 was supposed to outclass and outperform Windows Vista and Mac OSX.
But due to lawsuits it never got released.The best open source project to come out of the Amiga technology is Amiga Research OS [sourceforge.net] which will work on Intel X86 systems and virtual machines and has a version that runs native inside of Linux.
But it lacks proper third party hardware drivers for modern systems so I'd run it in VirtualBox or some other virtual machine like HaikuOS does.
AROS is AmigaOS 3.1 based on the APIs and started out as a WINE product and became a full OS.Amiga, Inc. sells some of the classic Amiga games for Windows and mobile devices under the Amiga Anywhere titles.
Some day like the C64 they will port them to the WII, PS3, and XBox 360, etc.In an attempt to open source and modernize the Amiga and AmigaOS technology they are taking a page from Apple and making an AmigaOS merge with Linux to create Anubis OS [anubis-os.org] but it is not Amiga, Inc that is doing it but another group.
While Mac OS X was based on NextStep (A MACH kernel *BSD Unix based OS) and the Classic MacOS series the Anubis OS claims to be Linux based with the Amiga GUI and ability to run Amiga software.I hereby challenge Slashdot editors and readers to report on the Amiga projects as they mature and make progress.
See if 2010 can be the year of the Amiga coverage at Slashdot and create an Amiga category if one doesn't already exist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611984</id>
	<title>Re:Old modems</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1262274660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just have an issue mostly with AT&amp;T being on the list, but only for the justification. Their brand is instantly recognizable... <strong>as Evil</strong>. I don't know much of anyone who doesn't think their continued existence is anything but unconscionable. The author is quite wrong about Polaroid digital cameras, they do have a distinguishing mark: the mark of <em>crap</em>. Polaroid cameras have crap hardware <em>and</em> crap software, and are to be avoided at all costs. Packard-Bell, of course, is one of the most deserving names on that sucker... but who can argue with C= or SCO?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just have an issue mostly with AT&amp;T being on the list , but only for the justification .
Their brand is instantly recognizable... as Evil .
I do n't know much of anyone who does n't think their continued existence is anything but unconscionable .
The author is quite wrong about Polaroid digital cameras , they do have a distinguishing mark : the mark of crap .
Polaroid cameras have crap hardware and crap software , and are to be avoided at all costs .
Packard-Bell , of course , is one of the most deserving names on that sucker... but who can argue with C = or SCO ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just have an issue mostly with AT&amp;T being on the list, but only for the justification.
Their brand is instantly recognizable... as Evil.
I don't know much of anyone who doesn't think their continued existence is anything but unconscionable.
The author is quite wrong about Polaroid digital cameras, they do have a distinguishing mark: the mark of crap.
Polaroid cameras have crap hardware and crap software, and are to be avoided at all costs.
Packard-Bell, of course, is one of the most deserving names on that sucker... but who can argue with C= or SCO?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30619026</id>
	<title>Re:reverse effect?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230826140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah everyone outside of the US is a 20 something. Or do you mean that everyone who hasn't read Wiki is a 20 something?

You definitely don't seem like your just being an ass trying to show off that you either knew one of the few stores in the world that had it or have read the Wiki.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah everyone outside of the US is a 20 something .
Or do you mean that everyone who has n't read Wiki is a 20 something ?
You definitely do n't seem like your just being an ass trying to show off that you either knew one of the few stores in the world that had it or have read the Wiki .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah everyone outside of the US is a 20 something.
Or do you mean that everyone who hasn't read Wiki is a 20 something?
You definitely don't seem like your just being an ass trying to show off that you either knew one of the few stores in the world that had it or have read the Wiki.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611340</id>
	<title>Re:digital</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262266440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not clear that they could have been saved.  They were basically steamrolled by the PC/x86 commoditization of the hardware market.  What was left of the mid-systems market went to the Unix vendors who managed to convince people that they offered a consistent development platform for applications.  The market for VAX evaporated rather quickly.</p><p>Oh, if they had a crystal ball I suppose they could've thrown much of their resources into x86 systems development, but that's not realistic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not clear that they could have been saved .
They were basically steamrolled by the PC/x86 commoditization of the hardware market .
What was left of the mid-systems market went to the Unix vendors who managed to convince people that they offered a consistent development platform for applications .
The market for VAX evaporated rather quickly.Oh , if they had a crystal ball I suppose they could 've thrown much of their resources into x86 systems development , but that 's not realistic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not clear that they could have been saved.
They were basically steamrolled by the PC/x86 commoditization of the hardware market.
What was left of the mid-systems market went to the Unix vendors who managed to convince people that they offered a consistent development platform for applications.
The market for VAX evaporated rather quickly.Oh, if they had a crystal ball I suppose they could've thrown much of their resources into x86 systems development, but that's not realistic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610470</id>
	<title>Apple!</title>
	<author>Tumbleweed</author>
	<datestamp>1262258220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depending on your perspective, I'd put Apple on the list. As soon as Jobs' marketing ego took over the company from Woz' technical brilliance (see a pattern here?), this company went all screwy. This happened with the original Mac (a pattern which Jobs would repeat). Let's replace our monumentally successful, paradigm-shifting platform (Apple 2) with something that costs 2x as much, and doesn't even have color (or available software base)! Yeah, awesome idea. Oh, and seal up the box, we don't want users installing any pesky expansion cards or more memory.</p><p>Jobs later went on to make NeXT, where he doubled (or more) (again) the price of the machine, and again started with a monochrome display (not sure about the expandability of NeXT cubes). This dude is a bit weird.</p><p>I much prefer Apple from their 8-bit days. The<nobr> <wbr></nobr>//GS was delayed, then crippled by marketing decisions. Very sad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depending on your perspective , I 'd put Apple on the list .
As soon as Jobs ' marketing ego took over the company from Woz ' technical brilliance ( see a pattern here ?
) , this company went all screwy .
This happened with the original Mac ( a pattern which Jobs would repeat ) .
Let 's replace our monumentally successful , paradigm-shifting platform ( Apple 2 ) with something that costs 2x as much , and does n't even have color ( or available software base ) !
Yeah , awesome idea .
Oh , and seal up the box , we do n't want users installing any pesky expansion cards or more memory.Jobs later went on to make NeXT , where he doubled ( or more ) ( again ) the price of the machine , and again started with a monochrome display ( not sure about the expandability of NeXT cubes ) .
This dude is a bit weird.I much prefer Apple from their 8-bit days .
The //GS was delayed , then crippled by marketing decisions .
Very sad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depending on your perspective, I'd put Apple on the list.
As soon as Jobs' marketing ego took over the company from Woz' technical brilliance (see a pattern here?
), this company went all screwy.
This happened with the original Mac (a pattern which Jobs would repeat).
Let's replace our monumentally successful, paradigm-shifting platform (Apple 2) with something that costs 2x as much, and doesn't even have color (or available software base)!
Yeah, awesome idea.
Oh, and seal up the box, we don't want users installing any pesky expansion cards or more memory.Jobs later went on to make NeXT, where he doubled (or more) (again) the price of the machine, and again started with a monochrome display (not sure about the expandability of NeXT cubes).
This dude is a bit weird.I much prefer Apple from their 8-bit days.
The //GS was delayed, then crippled by marketing decisions.
Very sad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611216</id>
	<title>Re:Silicon Graphics</title>
	<author>TheGratefulNet</author>
	<datestamp>1262265360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>soon, add Sun to the list (I'm willing to bet)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>soon , add Sun to the list ( I 'm willing to bet )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>soon, add Sun to the list (I'm willing to bet)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609808</id>
	<title>No Novell?</title>
	<author>Salo2112</author>
	<datestamp>1262254080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>No Novell? They used to own the LAN, and now they feed off MS scraps....</htmltext>
<tokenext>No Novell ?
They used to own the LAN , and now they feed off MS scraps... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Novell?
They used to own the LAN, and now they feed off MS scraps....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610346</id>
	<title>Dell?</title>
	<author>kehren77</author>
	<datestamp>1262257500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How did Dell not make this list?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How did Dell not make this list ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did Dell not make this list?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612108</id>
	<title>Re:Napster was respected when?</title>
	<author>Deadstick</author>
	<datestamp>1262276340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The original Commodore....</p><p>-Marketed a disk drive that had a hundred percent failure rate, couldn't be stacked because of overheating, and was the slowest floppy drive ever built.<br>-Marketed a computer that accessed that drive by sending BASIC statements, in ASCII, down a serial bus.<br>-Advertised that the drive was user-programmable and refused to release programming information for it.<br>-Marketed a computer whose ROM kernel routines didn't work, so programmers had to take up scarce RAM with their own routines to do stuff like moving the cursor.<br>-Couldn't even spell "kernel". They called it the "Kernal".</p><p>And they went downhill?</p><p>rj</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The original Commodore....-Marketed a disk drive that had a hundred percent failure rate , could n't be stacked because of overheating , and was the slowest floppy drive ever built.-Marketed a computer that accessed that drive by sending BASIC statements , in ASCII , down a serial bus.-Advertised that the drive was user-programmable and refused to release programming information for it.-Marketed a computer whose ROM kernel routines did n't work , so programmers had to take up scarce RAM with their own routines to do stuff like moving the cursor.-Could n't even spell " kernel " .
They called it the " Kernal " .And they went downhill ? rj</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original Commodore....-Marketed a disk drive that had a hundred percent failure rate, couldn't be stacked because of overheating, and was the slowest floppy drive ever built.-Marketed a computer that accessed that drive by sending BASIC statements, in ASCII, down a serial bus.-Advertised that the drive was user-programmable and refused to release programming information for it.-Marketed a computer whose ROM kernel routines didn't work, so programmers had to take up scarce RAM with their own routines to do stuff like moving the cursor.-Couldn't even spell "kernel".
They called it the "Kernal".And they went downhill?rj</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609526</id>
	<title>AOL</title>
	<author>Aeros</author>
	<datestamp>1262252400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow AOL sure did screw up alot of good products.  Sad</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow AOL sure did screw up alot of good products .
Sad</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow AOL sure did screw up alot of good products.
Sad</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609760</id>
	<title>reverse effect?</title>
	<author>cashman73</author>
	<datestamp>1262253780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What about the reverse effect of this? What I mean by that, are brands that went from being very poor, bottom dwelling no name brands to being something somewhat respected? Like DIVX, which went from being a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIVX" title="wikipedia.org">much hated, big brotherish "movie rental" company</a> [wikipedia.org], to a company that makes <a href="http://www.divx.com/en/win" title="divx.com">a widely used video player and format for internet video</a> [divx.com] today. Granted, the **AA still doesn't give them much credit, but consumers seem to like it,. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What about the reverse effect of this ?
What I mean by that , are brands that went from being very poor , bottom dwelling no name brands to being something somewhat respected ?
Like DIVX , which went from being a much hated , big brotherish " movie rental " company [ wikipedia.org ] , to a company that makes a widely used video player and format for internet video [ divx.com ] today .
Granted , the * * AA still does n't give them much credit , but consumers seem to like it, .
. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about the reverse effect of this?
What I mean by that, are brands that went from being very poor, bottom dwelling no name brands to being something somewhat respected?
Like DIVX, which went from being a much hated, big brotherish "movie rental" company [wikipedia.org], to a company that makes a widely used video player and format for internet video [divx.com] today.
Granted, the **AA still doesn't give them much credit, but consumers seem to like it,.
. .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610490</id>
	<title>RCA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262258400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They bet the bank going up against Philips Laserdisc  with their cheapo Selectavision and lost big time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They bet the bank going up against Philips Laserdisc with their cheapo Selectavision and lost big time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They bet the bank going up against Philips Laserdisc  with their cheapo Selectavision and lost big time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609714</id>
	<title>You have to rise to fall</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262253600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article is about names that were once beloved, that have falled from grace.</p><p>From day 1 I challenge you to find anyone who "loved" Packard-Bell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article is about names that were once beloved , that have falled from grace.From day 1 I challenge you to find anyone who " loved " Packard-Bell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article is about names that were once beloved, that have falled from grace.From day 1 I challenge you to find anyone who "loved" Packard-Bell.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</id>
	<title>To be Fair...</title>
	<author>clinko</author>
	<datestamp>1262253840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about Slashdot?</p><p>I know, we're the converted, but think about how Gizmodo and Engadget have changed how "Tech News" is reported.</p><p>Slashdot used to be the ONLY good place to get tech news.  I remember telling someone "Slashdot is like the 'What's New' of Popular Mechanics, but free!"</p><p>I wouldn't even mention slashdot now.  I'm not leaving, but I don't see any reason to convert others...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about Slashdot ? I know , we 're the converted , but think about how Gizmodo and Engadget have changed how " Tech News " is reported.Slashdot used to be the ONLY good place to get tech news .
I remember telling someone " Slashdot is like the 'What 's New ' of Popular Mechanics , but free !
" I would n't even mention slashdot now .
I 'm not leaving , but I do n't see any reason to convert others.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about Slashdot?I know, we're the converted, but think about how Gizmodo and Engadget have changed how "Tech News" is reported.Slashdot used to be the ONLY good place to get tech news.
I remember telling someone "Slashdot is like the 'What's New' of Popular Mechanics, but free!
"I wouldn't even mention slashdot now.
I'm not leaving, but I don't see any reason to convert others...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610234</id>
	<title>Monster Cables?</title>
	<author>Ellis D. Tripp</author>
	<datestamp>1262256840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't remember a time when Monster Cable actually sold a worthwhile product.  As far as I can remember them (back into the 80s, anyway), it was always overpriced fancy-looking speaker cable that sounded no different than ordinary lamp cord from the electrical aisle at Home Depot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't remember a time when Monster Cable actually sold a worthwhile product .
As far as I can remember them ( back into the 80s , anyway ) , it was always overpriced fancy-looking speaker cable that sounded no different than ordinary lamp cord from the electrical aisle at Home Depot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't remember a time when Monster Cable actually sold a worthwhile product.
As far as I can remember them (back into the 80s, anyway), it was always overpriced fancy-looking speaker cable that sounded no different than ordinary lamp cord from the electrical aisle at Home Depot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612544</id>
	<title>Re:Napster was respected when?</title>
	<author>Tobor the Eighth Man</author>
	<datestamp>1262284380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Napster absolutely revolutionized the way mp3s were used. Prior to Napster, most mp3s were shared directly through websites or through FTP sites. Most people didn't have the patience for it. Napster made it possible to find absolutely any song, ever. It was one of the first steps to the all-info-accessible-find-anything internet we've got today. People nowadays don't remember that ten years ago, it was tough as hell to find particular things on the internet.</p><p>It's like video clips before youtube. Now you can find any popular moment from pretty much any popular show, event, whatever in seconds. Before youtube (and sites like it), you'd be sorting through page after page of google listings hoping to find what you were looking for.</p><p>Anyone who doubts the importance of napster isn't old enough to remember the internet before it came about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Napster absolutely revolutionized the way mp3s were used .
Prior to Napster , most mp3s were shared directly through websites or through FTP sites .
Most people did n't have the patience for it .
Napster made it possible to find absolutely any song , ever .
It was one of the first steps to the all-info-accessible-find-anything internet we 've got today .
People nowadays do n't remember that ten years ago , it was tough as hell to find particular things on the internet.It 's like video clips before youtube .
Now you can find any popular moment from pretty much any popular show , event , whatever in seconds .
Before youtube ( and sites like it ) , you 'd be sorting through page after page of google listings hoping to find what you were looking for.Anyone who doubts the importance of napster is n't old enough to remember the internet before it came about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Napster absolutely revolutionized the way mp3s were used.
Prior to Napster, most mp3s were shared directly through websites or through FTP sites.
Most people didn't have the patience for it.
Napster made it possible to find absolutely any song, ever.
It was one of the first steps to the all-info-accessible-find-anything internet we've got today.
People nowadays don't remember that ten years ago, it was tough as hell to find particular things on the internet.It's like video clips before youtube.
Now you can find any popular moment from pretty much any popular show, event, whatever in seconds.
Before youtube (and sites like it), you'd be sorting through page after page of google listings hoping to find what you were looking for.Anyone who doubts the importance of napster isn't old enough to remember the internet before it came about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611234</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Shack</title>
	<author>TheGratefulNet</author>
	<datestamp>1262265480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ever since they canceled the battery club card, things went downhill.  fast.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ever since they canceled the battery club card , things went downhill .
fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ever since they canceled the battery club card, things went downhill.
fast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609860</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30615950</id>
	<title>I can't tell which would be worse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230802140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Known bozo versus known clown</p><p><a href="http://cbs5.com/politics/carly.fiorina.senate.2.973661.html" title="cbs5.com" rel="nofollow">http://cbs5.com/politics/carly.fiorina.senate.2.973661.html</a> [cbs5.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Known bozo versus known clownhttp : //cbs5.com/politics/carly.fiorina.senate.2.973661.html [ cbs5.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Known bozo versus known clownhttp://cbs5.com/politics/carly.fiorina.senate.2.973661.html [cbs5.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611230</id>
	<title>Re:digital</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262265420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The culture inside DEC made that company unique, today threre is no one that can be compared. You only have to read the names of the people that worked there and what products they offered.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The culture inside DEC made that company unique , today threre is no one that can be compared .
You only have to read the names of the people that worked there and what products they offered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The culture inside DEC made that company unique, today threre is no one that can be compared.
You only have to read the names of the people that worked there and what products they offered.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609848</id>
	<title>adding 13 and 14 to the list..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262254380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>harrymcc and Timothy for submitting then posting this drivel....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>harrymcc and Timothy for submitting then posting this drivel... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>harrymcc and Timothy for submitting then posting this drivel....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614242</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Shack</title>
	<author>tautog</author>
	<datestamp>1230827640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The store where I worked (1994-5) was in a rural community (we sold a LOT of high gain TV antennas and CB radios, etc), so we didn't push the ID thing too hard. Usually, we asked IF we could have it and if refused, would bypass the entry.</p><p>But, we had a ton of repeat customers, so we knew them and didn't even have to ask their names. Most liked that we knew them in that small town sort of way.</p><p>The flipside to being in the boonies is that you had some real cretins from the deep hills. I seem to remember a couple of them ended up being banished because they were so difficult to deal with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The store where I worked ( 1994-5 ) was in a rural community ( we sold a LOT of high gain TV antennas and CB radios , etc ) , so we did n't push the ID thing too hard .
Usually , we asked IF we could have it and if refused , would bypass the entry.But , we had a ton of repeat customers , so we knew them and did n't even have to ask their names .
Most liked that we knew them in that small town sort of way.The flipside to being in the boonies is that you had some real cretins from the deep hills .
I seem to remember a couple of them ended up being banished because they were so difficult to deal with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The store where I worked (1994-5) was in a rural community (we sold a LOT of high gain TV antennas and CB radios, etc), so we didn't push the ID thing too hard.
Usually, we asked IF we could have it and if refused, would bypass the entry.But, we had a ton of repeat customers, so we knew them and didn't even have to ask their names.
Most liked that we knew them in that small town sort of way.The flipside to being in the boonies is that you had some real cretins from the deep hills.
I seem to remember a couple of them ended up being banished because they were so difficult to deal with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609914</id>
	<title>How about Tektronix?</title>
	<author>Chemisor</author>
	<datestamp>1262254740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is Tektronix still making anything? It used to be THE brand for oscilloscopes, but I haven't heard anything about them since the 7000 series.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Tektronix still making anything ?
It used to be THE brand for oscilloscopes , but I have n't heard anything about them since the 7000 series .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Tektronix still making anything?
It used to be THE brand for oscilloscopes, but I haven't heard anything about them since the 7000 series.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611322</id>
	<title>Re:Adobe</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1262266200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Nobody's quite sure what prompted the Apple/Adobe divorce</i>
<p>
It's fairly simple. First, Apple made expensive hardware, with a crap OS that was like Windows 3.1 (albeit with a better interface), while Microsoft was selling Windows NT for low-cost workstations using the Pentium Pro processor.
</p><p>
Then Apple started selling Final Cut Pro. That was about the time Adobe decided they would not bother to make software that ran on a competitor vendor's hardware. I guess it did not help that Adobe had years of software written in C++, while Steve Jobs wanted everyone to program in Objective-C for Ma OS X, either. Apple later developed Objective-C++, but for quite a while they lost developer mindshare when they switched to MacOS X.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody 's quite sure what prompted the Apple/Adobe divorce It 's fairly simple .
First , Apple made expensive hardware , with a crap OS that was like Windows 3.1 ( albeit with a better interface ) , while Microsoft was selling Windows NT for low-cost workstations using the Pentium Pro processor .
Then Apple started selling Final Cut Pro .
That was about the time Adobe decided they would not bother to make software that ran on a competitor vendor 's hardware .
I guess it did not help that Adobe had years of software written in C + + , while Steve Jobs wanted everyone to program in Objective-C for Ma OS X , either .
Apple later developed Objective-C + + , but for quite a while they lost developer mindshare when they switched to MacOS X .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody's quite sure what prompted the Apple/Adobe divorce

It's fairly simple.
First, Apple made expensive hardware, with a crap OS that was like Windows 3.1 (albeit with a better interface), while Microsoft was selling Windows NT for low-cost workstations using the Pentium Pro processor.
Then Apple started selling Final Cut Pro.
That was about the time Adobe decided they would not bother to make software that ran on a competitor vendor's hardware.
I guess it did not help that Adobe had years of software written in C++, while Steve Jobs wanted everyone to program in Objective-C for Ma OS X, either.
Apple later developed Objective-C++, but for quite a while they lost developer mindshare when they switched to MacOS X.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610476</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262258280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I beg to differ with your assertion.</p><p>See <a href="http://www.hpl.hp.com/news/2008/apr-jun/memristor.html" title="hp.com" rel="nofollow">this article</a> [hp.com] from 2008.  Last time I checked, that was in the last 10 years, and I would qualify that as great engineering.  You are probably to young to remember when the transistor first revolutionized tech; but my guess is that this research will have a similar impact over the next 10 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I beg to differ with your assertion.See this article [ hp.com ] from 2008 .
Last time I checked , that was in the last 10 years , and I would qualify that as great engineering .
You are probably to young to remember when the transistor first revolutionized tech ; but my guess is that this research will have a similar impact over the next 10 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I beg to differ with your assertion.See this article [hp.com] from 2008.
Last time I checked, that was in the last 10 years, and I would qualify that as great engineering.
You are probably to young to remember when the transistor first revolutionized tech; but my guess is that this research will have a similar impact over the next 10 years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610094</id>
	<title>Re:AOL</title>
	<author>wjsteele</author>
	<datestamp>1262255820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmmm... I'm trying to figure out ONE single good product they had to begin with.<br> <br>Bill</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm... I 'm trying to figure out ONE single good product they had to begin with .
Bill</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm... I'm trying to figure out ONE single good product they had to begin with.
Bill</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30619878</id>
	<title>Re:geek squad should be on the list Best Buy turne</title>
	<author>AK Marc</author>
	<datestamp>1230835980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I never heard of Geek Squad before Best Buy housed them.  Were they something bought by Best Buy?  I thought they were just a new department.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I never heard of Geek Squad before Best Buy housed them .
Were they something bought by Best Buy ?
I thought they were just a new department .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never heard of Geek Squad before Best Buy housed them.
Were they something bought by Best Buy?
I thought they were just a new department.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610000</id>
	<title>What about the Acme Buggy Whip Company?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262255280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why aren't they on the list too?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are n't they on the list too ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why aren't they on the list too?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611014</id>
	<title>Schwinn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262263440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not "high-tech" related, but you could add <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6642037/" title="msn.com" rel="nofollow">Schwinn bicycles</a> [msn.com] to that list.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not " high-tech " related , but you could add Schwinn bicycles [ msn.com ] to that list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not "high-tech" related, but you could add Schwinn bicycles [msn.com] to that list.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610080</id>
	<title>Re:Napster was respected when?</title>
	<author>SoundGuyNoise</author>
	<datestamp>1262255640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Without Napster giving it away for free, Apple band-wagoning and creating iTunes, selling for $1 a pop.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Without Napster giving it away for free , Apple band-wagoning and creating iTunes , selling for $ 1 a pop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without Napster giving it away for free, Apple band-wagoning and creating iTunes, selling for $1 a pop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611662</id>
	<title>Re:Some substitutions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262269860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now if we jump into the audio world</p></div><p>No kidding.  No highs, no lows, must be...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now if we jump into the audio worldNo kidding .
No highs , no lows , must be.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now if we jump into the audio worldNo kidding.
No highs, no lows, must be...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610506</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262258580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What would go a long way towards Slashdot retaining it's usefulness is if they'd refrain from re-posting these list articles. How is "The Twelve Most Tarnished Brands In Tech" any more substantive than "50 Ways To Please Your Man"? It's not. These list posts are useless linkbait for blogs, and it's sad that what was a promising new medium (Remember reading about how blogs were going to change the world? Notice how no one says that anymore?) tries so hard now to emulate the junky checkout-line fodder that magazines became. Hell, it's all published by the same companies now anyway.</p><p>Those articles don't need to be here, and the "they should add COMPANY X to the list! Because this one time..." comments don't need to be here either.</p><p>I know...don't like it, don't read it. I didn't. But I felt compelled to say that we're witnessing the passing of a decent forum. It's not the end of the world, but I am sad to see it go. (They've probably got more readers now than ever, but financial success is not what I'm referring to.)</p><p>The reason why I stay anonymous these days is not cowardice, it's apathy. Meh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What would go a long way towards Slashdot retaining it 's usefulness is if they 'd refrain from re-posting these list articles .
How is " The Twelve Most Tarnished Brands In Tech " any more substantive than " 50 Ways To Please Your Man " ?
It 's not .
These list posts are useless linkbait for blogs , and it 's sad that what was a promising new medium ( Remember reading about how blogs were going to change the world ?
Notice how no one says that anymore ?
) tries so hard now to emulate the junky checkout-line fodder that magazines became .
Hell , it 's all published by the same companies now anyway.Those articles do n't need to be here , and the " they should add COMPANY X to the list !
Because this one time... " comments do n't need to be here either.I know...do n't like it , do n't read it .
I did n't .
But I felt compelled to say that we 're witnessing the passing of a decent forum .
It 's not the end of the world , but I am sad to see it go .
( They 've probably got more readers now than ever , but financial success is not what I 'm referring to .
) The reason why I stay anonymous these days is not cowardice , it 's apathy .
Meh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would go a long way towards Slashdot retaining it's usefulness is if they'd refrain from re-posting these list articles.
How is "The Twelve Most Tarnished Brands In Tech" any more substantive than "50 Ways To Please Your Man"?
It's not.
These list posts are useless linkbait for blogs, and it's sad that what was a promising new medium (Remember reading about how blogs were going to change the world?
Notice how no one says that anymore?
) tries so hard now to emulate the junky checkout-line fodder that magazines became.
Hell, it's all published by the same companies now anyway.Those articles don't need to be here, and the "they should add COMPANY X to the list!
Because this one time..." comments don't need to be here either.I know...don't like it, don't read it.
I didn't.
But I felt compelled to say that we're witnessing the passing of a decent forum.
It's not the end of the world, but I am sad to see it go.
(They've probably got more readers now than ever, but financial success is not what I'm referring to.
)The reason why I stay anonymous these days is not cowardice, it's apathy.
Meh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610722</id>
	<title>Re:HP didn't make the list?</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1262260560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And IBM, GE, and others are joining them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And IBM , GE , and others are joining them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And IBM, GE, and others are joining them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610732</id>
	<title>Re:You have to rise to fall</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262260680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Go to Europe, they are quite respected there, or so I've been told.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Go to Europe , they are quite respected there , or so I 've been told .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go to Europe, they are quite respected there, or so I've been told.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610124</id>
	<title>Oh, oh... I've got one!!!</title>
	<author>wjsteele</author>
	<datestamp>1262256060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about this one:  Slashdot!!!<br> <br>

Remember when they used to give us the news ONCE, BEFORE everyone else did?<br> <br>

Bill</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about this one : Slashdot ! ! !
Remember when they used to give us the news ONCE , BEFORE everyone else did ?
Bill</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about this one:  Slashdot!!!
Remember when they used to give us the news ONCE, BEFORE everyone else did?
Bill</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610812</id>
	<title>Re:Apple!</title>
	<author>BitwizeGHC</author>
	<datestamp>1262261340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Woz was a technical genius but it's Jobs's design and marketing vision that has enabled Apple to revolutionize electronics not once, not twice, not thrice, but four times: first with the Apple I and II, secondly with the Macintosh, thirdly with the iPod, and now with the iPhone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Woz was a technical genius but it 's Jobs 's design and marketing vision that has enabled Apple to revolutionize electronics not once , not twice , not thrice , but four times : first with the Apple I and II , secondly with the Macintosh , thirdly with the iPod , and now with the iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Woz was a technical genius but it's Jobs's design and marketing vision that has enabled Apple to revolutionize electronics not once, not twice, not thrice, but four times: first with the Apple I and II, secondly with the Macintosh, thirdly with the iPod, and now with the iPhone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612910</id>
	<title>Re:WANG computers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230802740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And what's even funnier - it's the slang name for a penis too!</htmltext>
<tokenext>And what 's even funnier - it 's the slang name for a penis too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what's even funnier - it's the slang name for a penis too!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610296</id>
	<title>DEC at least died an honorable death</title>
	<author>ThrowAwaySociety</author>
	<datestamp>1262257140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unlike the companies in the article, the DEC brand is not being pimped by a lousy shell company to licensors that are slapping it on discount pantyhose.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unlike the companies in the article , the DEC brand is not being pimped by a lousy shell company to licensors that are slapping it on discount pantyhose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unlike the companies in the article, the DEC brand is not being pimped by a lousy shell company to licensors that are slapping it on discount pantyhose.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611124</id>
	<title>Re:HP didn't make the list?</title>
	<author>haruchai</author>
	<datestamp>1262264520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you care to nominate HP, I'll second the motion. We've come to despise them for both their services and<br>their products. And, they have a couple of account managers who can only be described as oily. Unfortunately,<br>they're assigned to our account and we can't seem to get rid of them.</p><p>And I've never heard the word "can't" used so often by techheads - considering that Hewlett and Packard essentially<br>founded the original garage startup. They must both be rolling in their graves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you care to nominate HP , I 'll second the motion .
We 've come to despise them for both their services andtheir products .
And , they have a couple of account managers who can only be described as oily .
Unfortunately,they 're assigned to our account and we ca n't seem to get rid of them.And I 've never heard the word " ca n't " used so often by techheads - considering that Hewlett and Packard essentiallyfounded the original garage startup .
They must both be rolling in their graves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you care to nominate HP, I'll second the motion.
We've come to despise them for both their services andtheir products.
And, they have a couple of account managers who can only be described as oily.
Unfortunately,they're assigned to our account and we can't seem to get rid of them.And I've never heard the word "can't" used so often by techheads - considering that Hewlett and Packard essentiallyfounded the original garage startup.
They must both be rolling in their graves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610190</id>
	<title>Re:reverse effect?</title>
	<author>jmcbain</author>
	<datestamp>1262256480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like any young kid, you are confusing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIVX\_(Digital\_Video\_Express)" title="wikipedia.org">DIVX</a> [wikipedia.org] (Digital Video Express self-destructing video discs) from Circuit City with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DivX" title="wikipedia.org">"DivX<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)"</a> [wikipedia.org] the codec and codec company. They are <strong>completely</strong> unrelated. In fact, the "DivX<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)" name has a winky emoticon to signify that it's mocking the DIVX name.

I see a lot of you twenty-somethings online these days. Whenever an old-timer like me (and I'm in my 30s) says that DIVX sucked, you folks immediately spout "but but but DivX plays fine on my computer." Impressive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like any young kid , you are confusing DIVX [ wikipedia.org ] ( Digital Video Express self-destructing video discs ) from Circuit City with " DivX : - ) " [ wikipedia.org ] the codec and codec company .
They are completely unrelated .
In fact , the " DivX ; - ) " name has a winky emoticon to signify that it 's mocking the DIVX name .
I see a lot of you twenty-somethings online these days .
Whenever an old-timer like me ( and I 'm in my 30s ) says that DIVX sucked , you folks immediately spout " but but but DivX plays fine on my computer .
" Impressive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like any young kid, you are confusing DIVX [wikipedia.org] (Digital Video Express self-destructing video discs) from Circuit City with "DivX :-)" [wikipedia.org] the codec and codec company.
They are completely unrelated.
In fact, the "DivX ;-)" name has a winky emoticon to signify that it's mocking the DIVX name.
I see a lot of you twenty-somethings online these days.
Whenever an old-timer like me (and I'm in my 30s) says that DIVX sucked, you folks immediately spout "but but but DivX plays fine on my computer.
" Impressive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611120</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262264520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is pretty much the dumbest comment I have seen in a while. All the sheeple get caught in engadget/gizmodo not even realizing youre reading a fucking blog. If you asked around where I work who actually relies o n gizmodo for technical advice you would hear crickets</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is pretty much the dumbest comment I have seen in a while .
All the sheeple get caught in engadget/gizmodo not even realizing youre reading a fucking blog .
If you asked around where I work who actually relies o n gizmodo for technical advice you would hear crickets</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is pretty much the dumbest comment I have seen in a while.
All the sheeple get caught in engadget/gizmodo not even realizing youre reading a fucking blog.
If you asked around where I work who actually relies o n gizmodo for technical advice you would hear crickets</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610226</id>
	<title>Personal Anecdote</title>
	<author>BenEnglishAtHome</author>
	<datestamp>1262256780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was on the phone with HP Premium Printer Support when the official announcement was made in their office that Carly was leaving.</p><p>All hell broke loose.  People were screaming, crying, shouting for joy.  It sounded like total pandemonium.  It sounded like the celebrations of slaves suddenly freed from a cruel master.</p><p>It was nearly impossible to finish the call.  Having worked under cruel/crazy/incompetent bosses before and known the joy of release when they move on, I couldn't help but be happy for them.  HP may have never recovered but for at least a few minutes those poor folks had hope, God bless 'em.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was on the phone with HP Premium Printer Support when the official announcement was made in their office that Carly was leaving.All hell broke loose .
People were screaming , crying , shouting for joy .
It sounded like total pandemonium .
It sounded like the celebrations of slaves suddenly freed from a cruel master.It was nearly impossible to finish the call .
Having worked under cruel/crazy/incompetent bosses before and known the joy of release when they move on , I could n't help but be happy for them .
HP may have never recovered but for at least a few minutes those poor folks had hope , God bless 'em .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was on the phone with HP Premium Printer Support when the official announcement was made in their office that Carly was leaving.All hell broke loose.
People were screaming, crying, shouting for joy.
It sounded like total pandemonium.
It sounded like the celebrations of slaves suddenly freed from a cruel master.It was nearly impossible to finish the call.
Having worked under cruel/crazy/incompetent bosses before and known the joy of release when they move on, I couldn't help but be happy for them.
HP may have never recovered but for at least a few minutes those poor folks had hope, God bless 'em.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612752</id>
	<title>Re:SCO</title>
	<author>RMS Eats Toejam</author>
	<datestamp>1262288520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>To Linux fanboys?  Yes.  To everyone else.... SCO who?</htmltext>
<tokenext>To Linux fanboys ?
Yes. To everyone else.... SCO who ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To Linux fanboys?
Yes.  To everyone else.... SCO who?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613646</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>PixetaledPikachu</author>
	<datestamp>1230819660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Have you seen their recent blade server technology? While their support is awful, the hardware itself (namely the C-class blades) is pretty impressive.</p></div><p>Amen to that. We deploy clusters of BL460c G1s that runs very smooth. I like how the design that let you remove hard drives without having to dismantle the servers. That is one of the reason why I choose the C-class over IBM's HS blade servers. the iLO2 is also far superior that it's IBM counterpart.


However, if you're going to run lots of HP servers on your data center, having an extended maintenance contract is essential. When one of my HP BL20p crapped out, it takes 2 weeks for HP to get replacement part for the board.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you seen their recent blade server technology ?
While their support is awful , the hardware itself ( namely the C-class blades ) is pretty impressive.Amen to that .
We deploy clusters of BL460c G1s that runs very smooth .
I like how the design that let you remove hard drives without having to dismantle the servers .
That is one of the reason why I choose the C-class over IBM 's HS blade servers .
the iLO2 is also far superior that it 's IBM counterpart .
However , if you 're going to run lots of HP servers on your data center , having an extended maintenance contract is essential .
When one of my HP BL20p crapped out , it takes 2 weeks for HP to get replacement part for the board .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you seen their recent blade server technology?
While their support is awful, the hardware itself (namely the C-class blades) is pretty impressive.Amen to that.
We deploy clusters of BL460c G1s that runs very smooth.
I like how the design that let you remove hard drives without having to dismantle the servers.
That is one of the reason why I choose the C-class over IBM's HS blade servers.
the iLO2 is also far superior that it's IBM counterpart.
However, if you're going to run lots of HP servers on your data center, having an extended maintenance contract is essential.
When one of my HP BL20p crapped out, it takes 2 weeks for HP to get replacement part for the board.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610448</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>mindbrane</author>
	<datestamp>1262258100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I took a 4 year leave from<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. (you're welcome) and came back (there's little you can do about it) after having taken a look at most of the prominent alternatives. There are two outstanding reasons I returned to Slashdot. First<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. is a decent tech site that has a bias toward open source. I first came here in the late 90's to learn about Linux. Secondly the fine print still reads the same: All comments are owned by the poster. Slashdot remains a place where I can see the tech world through an Open Source lens, freely post my opinions and retain ownership and responsibility for said comments. And I appreciate<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. such as it is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I took a 4 year leave from / .
( you 're welcome ) and came back ( there 's little you can do about it ) after having taken a look at most of the prominent alternatives .
There are two outstanding reasons I returned to Slashdot .
First / .
is a decent tech site that has a bias toward open source .
I first came here in the late 90 's to learn about Linux .
Secondly the fine print still reads the same : All comments are owned by the poster .
Slashdot remains a place where I can see the tech world through an Open Source lens , freely post my opinions and retain ownership and responsibility for said comments .
And I appreciate / .
such as it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I took a 4 year leave from /.
(you're welcome) and came back (there's little you can do about it) after having taken a look at most of the prominent alternatives.
There are two outstanding reasons I returned to Slashdot.
First /.
is a decent tech site that has a bias toward open source.
I first came here in the late 90's to learn about Linux.
Secondly the fine print still reads the same: All comments are owned by the poster.
Slashdot remains a place where I can see the tech world through an Open Source lens, freely post my opinions and retain ownership and responsibility for said comments.
And I appreciate /.
such as it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610922</id>
	<title>Re:AOL</title>
	<author>MBCook</author>
	<datestamp>1262262420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm glad they're mostly gone. They wouldn't move past their little cabal when the web started exploding. Then they tried to force you to use their terribly awful browser, hobbling the internet for developers for quite a while.
</p><p>Many people, my parents included, <i>still</i> use AOL for mail. It's free now, but it's still horrible. If you've read a message and don't keep it as new or save it, <i>it will delete it for you</i> after a short while. Google gives out <i>gigs</i> of mail and AOL is <i>still deleting 3kb messages you read</i>.
</p><p>Then, their is their worst sin of all. <b>They bought and killed <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImagiNation\_Network" title="wikipedia.org">The ImagiNation Network</a> [wikipedia.org] </b>. That was an amazing service at the time, especially multiplayer RedBaron. They could have turned that into a real property with their size. Instead they killed it.
</p><p>The only thing they did of popularity these days is AIM, and I think that may have been a simple size thing. Sure ICQ was popular first, but AOL was what got <i>millions</i> of people to instant messages and made it friendly (as opposed to being person 19305359).
</p><p>If they didn't have all the ads on AIM, they probably would have died a couple of years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm glad they 're mostly gone .
They would n't move past their little cabal when the web started exploding .
Then they tried to force you to use their terribly awful browser , hobbling the internet for developers for quite a while .
Many people , my parents included , still use AOL for mail .
It 's free now , but it 's still horrible .
If you 've read a message and do n't keep it as new or save it , it will delete it for you after a short while .
Google gives out gigs of mail and AOL is still deleting 3kb messages you read .
Then , their is their worst sin of all .
They bought and killed The ImagiNation Network [ wikipedia.org ] .
That was an amazing service at the time , especially multiplayer RedBaron .
They could have turned that into a real property with their size .
Instead they killed it .
The only thing they did of popularity these days is AIM , and I think that may have been a simple size thing .
Sure ICQ was popular first , but AOL was what got millions of people to instant messages and made it friendly ( as opposed to being person 19305359 ) .
If they did n't have all the ads on AIM , they probably would have died a couple of years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm glad they're mostly gone.
They wouldn't move past their little cabal when the web started exploding.
Then they tried to force you to use their terribly awful browser, hobbling the internet for developers for quite a while.
Many people, my parents included, still use AOL for mail.
It's free now, but it's still horrible.
If you've read a message and don't keep it as new or save it, it will delete it for you after a short while.
Google gives out gigs of mail and AOL is still deleting 3kb messages you read.
Then, their is their worst sin of all.
They bought and killed The ImagiNation Network [wikipedia.org] .
That was an amazing service at the time, especially multiplayer RedBaron.
They could have turned that into a real property with their size.
Instead they killed it.
The only thing they did of popularity these days is AIM, and I think that may have been a simple size thing.
Sure ICQ was popular first, but AOL was what got millions of people to instant messages and made it friendly (as opposed to being person 19305359).
If they didn't have all the ads on AIM, they probably would have died a couple of years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609886</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>TheRealFixer</author>
	<datestamp>1262254620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Interestingly, most all of their advances in server technology are directly descended from Compaq.<br>
<br>
IMO, keeping the ProLiant line was the one single smart thing that HP did after the Compaq acquisition.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interestingly , most all of their advances in server technology are directly descended from Compaq .
IMO , keeping the ProLiant line was the one single smart thing that HP did after the Compaq acquisition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interestingly, most all of their advances in server technology are directly descended from Compaq.
IMO, keeping the ProLiant line was the one single smart thing that HP did after the Compaq acquisition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609700</id>
	<title>Here's another one not on the list...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262253540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot might I propose?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot might I propose ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot might I propose?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</id>
	<title>HP</title>
	<author>joeflies</author>
	<datestamp>1262252400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>When you say HP, the first words that comes to mind is innovation and great engineering.  However you look at the past 10 years and HP has done surprisingly little in innovation or great engineering, and has not been creating market changing technology.  They've gotten stuck building pcs and selling printer ink because that's the safe way to make money.<p>

I don't know whether it was the compaq acquisition or the carly regime that made HP soft,. Maybe the HP name hasn't fallen and it's not tarnished as much as some of the other names on the list, but the company behind the brand isn't what it used to be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you say HP , the first words that comes to mind is innovation and great engineering .
However you look at the past 10 years and HP has done surprisingly little in innovation or great engineering , and has not been creating market changing technology .
They 've gotten stuck building pcs and selling printer ink because that 's the safe way to make money .
I do n't know whether it was the compaq acquisition or the carly regime that made HP soft, .
Maybe the HP name has n't fallen and it 's not tarnished as much as some of the other names on the list , but the company behind the brand is n't what it used to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you say HP, the first words that comes to mind is innovation and great engineering.
However you look at the past 10 years and HP has done surprisingly little in innovation or great engineering, and has not been creating market changing technology.
They've gotten stuck building pcs and selling printer ink because that's the safe way to make money.
I don't know whether it was the compaq acquisition or the carly regime that made HP soft,.
Maybe the HP name hasn't fallen and it's not tarnished as much as some of the other names on the list, but the company behind the brand isn't what it used to be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610958</id>
	<title>Playboy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262262840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Had a full head of hair - now it has gone bald<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:&gt;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Had a full head of hair - now it has gone bald : &gt;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Had a full head of hair - now it has gone bald :&gt;</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611452</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262267580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My best ever printer to this day (and it's our office workhorse) is the HP Laserjet 6MP. Bought it new in the day. Trickier to get it to run these days (Using Asantetalk to convert the Appletalk to ethernet), but a flawless printer. I've only ever had to buy cartridges for it (rarely). Had to have printed countless thousands of pages at this point.<br>I don't see any product on the market today from anyone that is as good with the quality of workmanship &amp; design.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My best ever printer to this day ( and it 's our office workhorse ) is the HP Laserjet 6MP .
Bought it new in the day .
Trickier to get it to run these days ( Using Asantetalk to convert the Appletalk to ethernet ) , but a flawless printer .
I 've only ever had to buy cartridges for it ( rarely ) .
Had to have printed countless thousands of pages at this point.I do n't see any product on the market today from anyone that is as good with the quality of workmanship &amp; design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My best ever printer to this day (and it's our office workhorse) is the HP Laserjet 6MP.
Bought it new in the day.
Trickier to get it to run these days (Using Asantetalk to convert the Appletalk to ethernet), but a flawless printer.
I've only ever had to buy cartridges for it (rarely).
Had to have printed countless thousands of pages at this point.I don't see any product on the market today from anyone that is as good with the quality of workmanship &amp; design.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610076</id>
	<title>Silicon Graphics</title>
	<author>Rob Riggs</author>
	<datestamp>1262255640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>SGI should be on that list.  It was amazing to watch their death spiral in the mid-late 90s.  That brand is way more tarnished than Napster (which didn't have much of a brand to tarnish).</htmltext>
<tokenext>SGI should be on that list .
It was amazing to watch their death spiral in the mid-late 90s .
That brand is way more tarnished than Napster ( which did n't have much of a brand to tarnish ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SGI should be on that list.
It was amazing to watch their death spiral in the mid-late 90s.
That brand is way more tarnished than Napster (which didn't have much of a brand to tarnish).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610682</id>
	<title>Re:HP</title>
	<author>temojen</author>
	<datestamp>1262260200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, the first things I think of are runaway printer drivers, Failed HDDs, Bloatware, and cases so thin that a parallel cable can tork a PCI riser out of it's socket.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the first things I think of are runaway printer drivers , Failed HDDs , Bloatware , and cases so thin that a parallel cable can tork a PCI riser out of it 's socket .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the first things I think of are runaway printer drivers, Failed HDDs, Bloatware, and cases so thin that a parallel cable can tork a PCI riser out of it's socket.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609454</id>
	<title>Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262252040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who trusts these bozos anymore?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who trusts these bozos anymore ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who trusts these bozos anymore?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613356</id>
	<title>How about SCO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230811740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Santa Cruz Operations may not have been a bright and shining star, but you can't get more tarnished...  And, yes I know the current patent troll only bought the name to give themselves "geek creds."</p><p>Back in the day SCO used to produce the only Unix for the PC called Xenix.  I always wanted one, but they went under before I had the chance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Santa Cruz Operations may not have been a bright and shining star , but you ca n't get more tarnished... And , yes I know the current patent troll only bought the name to give themselves " geek creds .
" Back in the day SCO used to produce the only Unix for the PC called Xenix .
I always wanted one , but they went under before I had the chance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Santa Cruz Operations may not have been a bright and shining star, but you can't get more tarnished...  And, yes I know the current patent troll only bought the name to give themselves "geek creds.
"Back in the day SCO used to produce the only Unix for the PC called Xenix.
I always wanted one, but they went under before I had the chance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610876</id>
	<title>Re:Where would 3d gaming be without...</title>
	<author>daoine\_sidhe</author>
	<datestamp>1262262060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>YES, great reference...I still have my trusty Voodoo 5 5500.  And people think SLI is a new thing....</htmltext>
<tokenext>YES , great reference...I still have my trusty Voodoo 5 5500 .
And people think SLI is a new thing... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>YES, great reference...I still have my trusty Voodoo 5 5500.
And people think SLI is a new thing....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610452</id>
	<title>Re:To be Fair...</title>
	<author>Idbar</author>
	<datestamp>1262258100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was thinking about writing this as AC, but I guess I have karma to burn.<br> <br>
I respectfully disagree, gizmodo is overwhelming, so it is Engadget. Slashdot has one feature I like the most, the commenting system with mod points.<br> <br>
However, if this "special treatment" to Apple products and some other mixed propaganda/advertisement continues, people will end up leaving. I hope not, because I've been having lots of fun here, reading comments.<br>As a foreigner in the US, I believe this site has still some valuable roots, but the little changes oriented heavily towards advertisement makes me think that they have become a little biased to report.<br> <br>
Dear Slashdot, I know that you're very US centric. But please give some credit to the community that supports and enjoys reading this website, and don't forget about us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was thinking about writing this as AC , but I guess I have karma to burn .
I respectfully disagree , gizmodo is overwhelming , so it is Engadget .
Slashdot has one feature I like the most , the commenting system with mod points .
However , if this " special treatment " to Apple products and some other mixed propaganda/advertisement continues , people will end up leaving .
I hope not , because I 've been having lots of fun here , reading comments.As a foreigner in the US , I believe this site has still some valuable roots , but the little changes oriented heavily towards advertisement makes me think that they have become a little biased to report .
Dear Slashdot , I know that you 're very US centric .
But please give some credit to the community that supports and enjoys reading this website , and do n't forget about us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was thinking about writing this as AC, but I guess I have karma to burn.
I respectfully disagree, gizmodo is overwhelming, so it is Engadget.
Slashdot has one feature I like the most, the commenting system with mod points.
However, if this "special treatment" to Apple products and some other mixed propaganda/advertisement continues, people will end up leaving.
I hope not, because I've been having lots of fun here, reading comments.As a foreigner in the US, I believe this site has still some valuable roots, but the little changes oriented heavily towards advertisement makes me think that they have become a little biased to report.
Dear Slashdot, I know that you're very US centric.
But please give some credit to the community that supports and enjoys reading this website, and don't forget about us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609656</id>
	<title>Where would 3d gaming be without...</title>
	<author>rjejr</author>
	<datestamp>1262253240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>3dfx?</htmltext>
<tokenext>3dfx ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3dfx?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611586</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Shack</title>
	<author>Concerned Onlooker</author>
	<datestamp>1262268960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, for those of you not old enough to remember, Radio Shack is actually better than it was about 8-9 years ago.  You couldn't buy an 89 cent connector without having to give your phone number and zip code.  And the sales people weren't helpful so much as they were like gnats buzzing about.</p><p>Now the sales people have learned to back off and you don't have to go through some ridiculous data exchange just to buy a resistor.  And speaking of which, Radio Shack is OK in my book simply for the fact that they are pretty much the sole remaining store in my area (Los Angeles)--aside from making  a major trek to Fry's--that actually carries a few electronics components.  It's very handy when you are in the middle of a project and you you can't wait to mail order a 10K resistor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , for those of you not old enough to remember , Radio Shack is actually better than it was about 8-9 years ago .
You could n't buy an 89 cent connector without having to give your phone number and zip code .
And the sales people were n't helpful so much as they were like gnats buzzing about.Now the sales people have learned to back off and you do n't have to go through some ridiculous data exchange just to buy a resistor .
And speaking of which , Radio Shack is OK in my book simply for the fact that they are pretty much the sole remaining store in my area ( Los Angeles ) --aside from making a major trek to Fry 's--that actually carries a few electronics components .
It 's very handy when you are in the middle of a project and you you ca n't wait to mail order a 10K resistor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, for those of you not old enough to remember, Radio Shack is actually better than it was about 8-9 years ago.
You couldn't buy an 89 cent connector without having to give your phone number and zip code.
And the sales people weren't helpful so much as they were like gnats buzzing about.Now the sales people have learned to back off and you don't have to go through some ridiculous data exchange just to buy a resistor.
And speaking of which, Radio Shack is OK in my book simply for the fact that they are pretty much the sole remaining store in my area (Los Angeles)--aside from making  a major trek to Fry's--that actually carries a few electronics components.
It's very handy when you are in the middle of a project and you you can't wait to mail order a 10K resistor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609860</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610682
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30619878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611694
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30621344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30620218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30619026
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30615950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30630490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610464
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612544
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611662
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30621280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30679684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_2032255_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610094
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609896
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612544
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611662
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611454
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613646
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609670
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610996
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30615950
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610502
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612774
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611040
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613518
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610422
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611694
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612828
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610226
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610682
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613486
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610348
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611014
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609936
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30619878
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609714
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610732
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611526
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609534
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610320
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30620218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613016
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610082
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609454
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30621344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610674
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30679684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609860
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611234
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611586
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614242
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612008
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610876
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610508
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611828
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614194
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610492
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609884
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610190
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30619026
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30630490
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612226
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30613988
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610402
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30614268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612910
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609492
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609808
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609782
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610194
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30621280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609772
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610684
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610812
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611216
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612956
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611306
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30609982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610010
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610506
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611426
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_2032255.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30610272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30612752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_2032255.30611598
</commentlist>
</conversation>
