<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_01_1817256</id>
	<title>Technology Changes To Kill Netbooks?</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1262371920000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>The BBC is reporting that the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8421491.stm">netbook craze may already be nearing the end of its run</a>.  Citing rising netbook prices and many other evolving technologies that can potentially fill that gap, some critics think that the limited power of netbooks will ultimately bring about the quick demise of the once popular device.  <i>"Ian Drew, spokesman for chip designer Arm, also believes netbooks are in for a shake-up. Consumers, he said, were chafing against the restrictions that using a netbook imposed on them.  'We have failed the consumer because we have imposed constraints on them,' he said.  Changing web habits and greater use of social media will mean consumers will be looking for gadgets that are tuned to specific purposes.  'It will be a lot of different machines for a lot of different people,' he said. 'This whole market will be exploding in the next couple of years.'  Impetus for this change will come, he believes, from the phone world where many, many types of gadgets are already blooming."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>The BBC is reporting that the netbook craze may already be nearing the end of its run .
Citing rising netbook prices and many other evolving technologies that can potentially fill that gap , some critics think that the limited power of netbooks will ultimately bring about the quick demise of the once popular device .
" Ian Drew , spokesman for chip designer Arm , also believes netbooks are in for a shake-up .
Consumers , he said , were chafing against the restrictions that using a netbook imposed on them .
'We have failed the consumer because we have imposed constraints on them, ' he said .
Changing web habits and greater use of social media will mean consumers will be looking for gadgets that are tuned to specific purposes .
'It will be a lot of different machines for a lot of different people, ' he said .
'This whole market will be exploding in the next couple of years .
' Impetus for this change will come , he believes , from the phone world where many , many types of gadgets are already blooming .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The BBC is reporting that the netbook craze may already be nearing the end of its run.
Citing rising netbook prices and many other evolving technologies that can potentially fill that gap, some critics think that the limited power of netbooks will ultimately bring about the quick demise of the once popular device.
"Ian Drew, spokesman for chip designer Arm, also believes netbooks are in for a shake-up.
Consumers, he said, were chafing against the restrictions that using a netbook imposed on them.
'We have failed the consumer because we have imposed constraints on them,' he said.
Changing web habits and greater use of social media will mean consumers will be looking for gadgets that are tuned to specific purposes.
'It will be a lot of different machines for a lot of different people,' he said.
'This whole market will be exploding in the next couple of years.
'  Impetus for this change will come, he believes, from the phone world where many, many types of gadgets are already blooming.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615926</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit. It can never die.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262337900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you cannot kill that which has no life</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you can not kill that which has no life</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you cannot kill that which has no life</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1262341080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course he's wrong.</p><p>When you hear people who make a popular product predict the demise of that product, what it usually means is the profit margins aren't big enough, so they're about to come out with some new, more expensive product that has higher margins.</p><p>The local stores have been having trouble keeping many of the netbook models in stock.  The downward pressure on prices has been strong due to competition and online sales.</p><p>Instead of improving the product at the same price point, taking advantage of larger production runs and efficiencies to lower prices, things which companies usually do, they're going to see if they can sell less for more.  Instead of $99 netbooks, which is the next logical step, we'll end up with &gt;$400 netbooks that will have better graphics, telco tie-ins, 3G instead of wi-fi and other limiting "features". The things that made netbooks so popular will be replaced by things which make more money for the manufacturers and telcos.  You see this kind of short-sighted behavior in lots of industries, not just consumer electronics.  They'll say "this is not a product that consumers want". In this new top-down economy, the manufacturers tell us what we want, instead of the other way around.</p><p>There's no reason we couldn't see a $99 netbook that would surf the web, do email, light productivity apps, etc.  How many of us would love a cheap netbook that you could put in a coat pocket or backpack that didn't way 3 pounds, had decent battery life and wifi?  It could run on some flavor of Linux.  It doesn't have to run the latest games, Photoshop or Windows.  But I predict that any company that tried to sell such a product would get tied up in patent lawsuits, hit with phony shortages from memory or processor suppliers or simply bought out by a bigger company.</p><p>If anything, the netbook is going to be a victim of its own success, killed by an industry that has morphed from one based on innovation to one based on corporate dictates.</p><p>Out consumer no longer treats consumers as anything but part of the mechanism that provides wealth to equity owners.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course he 's wrong.When you hear people who make a popular product predict the demise of that product , what it usually means is the profit margins are n't big enough , so they 're about to come out with some new , more expensive product that has higher margins.The local stores have been having trouble keeping many of the netbook models in stock .
The downward pressure on prices has been strong due to competition and online sales.Instead of improving the product at the same price point , taking advantage of larger production runs and efficiencies to lower prices , things which companies usually do , they 're going to see if they can sell less for more .
Instead of $ 99 netbooks , which is the next logical step , we 'll end up with &gt; $ 400 netbooks that will have better graphics , telco tie-ins , 3G instead of wi-fi and other limiting " features " .
The things that made netbooks so popular will be replaced by things which make more money for the manufacturers and telcos .
You see this kind of short-sighted behavior in lots of industries , not just consumer electronics .
They 'll say " this is not a product that consumers want " .
In this new top-down economy , the manufacturers tell us what we want , instead of the other way around.There 's no reason we could n't see a $ 99 netbook that would surf the web , do email , light productivity apps , etc .
How many of us would love a cheap netbook that you could put in a coat pocket or backpack that did n't way 3 pounds , had decent battery life and wifi ?
It could run on some flavor of Linux .
It does n't have to run the latest games , Photoshop or Windows .
But I predict that any company that tried to sell such a product would get tied up in patent lawsuits , hit with phony shortages from memory or processor suppliers or simply bought out by a bigger company.If anything , the netbook is going to be a victim of its own success , killed by an industry that has morphed from one based on innovation to one based on corporate dictates.Out consumer no longer treats consumers as anything but part of the mechanism that provides wealth to equity owners .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course he's wrong.When you hear people who make a popular product predict the demise of that product, what it usually means is the profit margins aren't big enough, so they're about to come out with some new, more expensive product that has higher margins.The local stores have been having trouble keeping many of the netbook models in stock.
The downward pressure on prices has been strong due to competition and online sales.Instead of improving the product at the same price point, taking advantage of larger production runs and efficiencies to lower prices, things which companies usually do, they're going to see if they can sell less for more.
Instead of $99 netbooks, which is the next logical step, we'll end up with &gt;$400 netbooks that will have better graphics, telco tie-ins, 3G instead of wi-fi and other limiting "features".
The things that made netbooks so popular will be replaced by things which make more money for the manufacturers and telcos.
You see this kind of short-sighted behavior in lots of industries, not just consumer electronics.
They'll say "this is not a product that consumers want".
In this new top-down economy, the manufacturers tell us what we want, instead of the other way around.There's no reason we couldn't see a $99 netbook that would surf the web, do email, light productivity apps, etc.
How many of us would love a cheap netbook that you could put in a coat pocket or backpack that didn't way 3 pounds, had decent battery life and wifi?
It could run on some flavor of Linux.
It doesn't have to run the latest games, Photoshop or Windows.
But I predict that any company that tried to sell such a product would get tied up in patent lawsuits, hit with phony shortages from memory or processor suppliers or simply bought out by a bigger company.If anything, the netbook is going to be a victim of its own success, killed by an industry that has morphed from one based on innovation to one based on corporate dictates.Out consumer no longer treats consumers as anything but part of the mechanism that provides wealth to equity owners.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30622530</id>
	<title>Re:What I want, I can no longer find</title>
	<author>gwdoiron</author>
	<datestamp>1262449980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can always retrofit.  If you gotta have your SSD, the Acer Aspire One machines use standard 2.5" notebook drives, the form factor that many SSD's come in (or have adapters for).  It's a bit more involved to swap out than your typical laptop hard disk, but the option is definitely there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can always retrofit .
If you got ta have your SSD , the Acer Aspire One machines use standard 2.5 " notebook drives , the form factor that many SSD 's come in ( or have adapters for ) .
It 's a bit more involved to swap out than your typical laptop hard disk , but the option is definitely there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can always retrofit.
If you gotta have your SSD, the Acer Aspire One machines use standard 2.5" notebook drives, the form factor that many SSD's come in (or have adapters for).
It's a bit more involved to swap out than your typical laptop hard disk, but the option is definitely there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618582</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618238</id>
	<title>Re:I want a small light notebook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262356140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what is exactly wrong with a MacBook Air ?<br>It fits your needs and since you didn't mention the price I suppose it doesn't matter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what is exactly wrong with a MacBook Air ? It fits your needs and since you did n't mention the price I suppose it does n't matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what is exactly wrong with a MacBook Air ?It fits your needs and since you didn't mention the price I suppose it doesn't matter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616556</id>
	<title>The future of netbooks depends mostly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262344260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the future of desktops. In 5-10 years I see the desktop as becoming a mini-cloud server, where you do the stuff you normally do on a desktop now, but also acting as the main controller for your tv/dvr. cofee-maker, oven/microwave/toaster, phone service ( hell the entire phone system will be replaced by VoIP ), car ( nice to have that engine all warned up on a cold day when you go out ot it ), heat/cooling system and anything else that uses an embedded computer. Plus a server for your laptop/netbook.</p><p>On your laptop you will still do most of the things that you do on your present laptop/netbook, surfing will be the same, you will still read your email, but it will get downloaded to yhour desktop and you will browse your desktops email cache. In other words the laptop will become a semismart terminal for your desktop.</p><p>From this perspective, netbooks come closer to what people will want as opposed to laptops. 1) long battery life, 2) Fairly large screen 3) decent keyboard/mouse ( laptops win on 2&amp;3 but for the most part they don';t determine netbooks ), 4) a touch screen ( which will become standard across all computers, 5) cheap enough so that if you lose it you don't cry. In fact I would want mine to be an IMF version of a laptop,,, after ten consecutive failed attempts to log in, I want it to self destruct.</p><p>The reason you hear this discussion of netbooks dieing is that the future netbook will not be running a version  of Windows ( see all the fanboys already yelling about that in this discussion ), and it will mean small margins for several of the hardware ( re Intel ) manufacturers.</p><p>HandyGandy</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the future of desktops .
In 5-10 years I see the desktop as becoming a mini-cloud server , where you do the stuff you normally do on a desktop now , but also acting as the main controller for your tv/dvr .
cofee-maker , oven/microwave/toaster , phone service ( hell the entire phone system will be replaced by VoIP ) , car ( nice to have that engine all warned up on a cold day when you go out ot it ) , heat/cooling system and anything else that uses an embedded computer .
Plus a server for your laptop/netbook.On your laptop you will still do most of the things that you do on your present laptop/netbook , surfing will be the same , you will still read your email , but it will get downloaded to yhour desktop and you will browse your desktops email cache .
In other words the laptop will become a semismart terminal for your desktop.From this perspective , netbooks come closer to what people will want as opposed to laptops .
1 ) long battery life , 2 ) Fairly large screen 3 ) decent keyboard/mouse ( laptops win on 2&amp;3 but for the most part they don ' ; t determine netbooks ) , 4 ) a touch screen ( which will become standard across all computers , 5 ) cheap enough so that if you lose it you do n't cry .
In fact I would want mine to be an IMF version of a laptop,, , after ten consecutive failed attempts to log in , I want it to self destruct.The reason you hear this discussion of netbooks dieing is that the future netbook will not be running a version of Windows ( see all the fanboys already yelling about that in this discussion ) , and it will mean small margins for several of the hardware ( re Intel ) manufacturers.HandyGandy  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the future of desktops.
In 5-10 years I see the desktop as becoming a mini-cloud server, where you do the stuff you normally do on a desktop now, but also acting as the main controller for your tv/dvr.
cofee-maker, oven/microwave/toaster, phone service ( hell the entire phone system will be replaced by VoIP ), car ( nice to have that engine all warned up on a cold day when you go out ot it ), heat/cooling system and anything else that uses an embedded computer.
Plus a server for your laptop/netbook.On your laptop you will still do most of the things that you do on your present laptop/netbook, surfing will be the same, you will still read your email, but it will get downloaded to yhour desktop and you will browse your desktops email cache.
In other words the laptop will become a semismart terminal for your desktop.From this perspective, netbooks come closer to what people will want as opposed to laptops.
1) long battery life, 2) Fairly large screen 3) decent keyboard/mouse ( laptops win on 2&amp;3 but for the most part they don';t determine netbooks ), 4) a touch screen ( which will become standard across all computers, 5) cheap enough so that if you lose it you don't cry.
In fact I would want mine to be an IMF version of a laptop,,, after ten consecutive failed attempts to log in, I want it to self destruct.The reason you hear this discussion of netbooks dieing is that the future netbook will not be running a version  of Windows ( see all the fanboys already yelling about that in this discussion ), and it will mean small margins for several of the hardware ( re Intel ) manufacturers.HandyGandy
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617482</id>
	<title>Company with vested interest in replacing netbooks</title>
	<author>capitaladot</author>
	<datestamp>1262351880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... predicts their death; news at 11.


I, for one, will not be welcoming any new, RISC-speaking overlords.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... predicts their death ; news at 11 .
I , for one , will not be welcoming any new , RISC-speaking overlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... predicts their death; news at 11.
I, for one, will not be welcoming any new, RISC-speaking overlords.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617700</id>
	<title>Re:Your post...where to start?</title>
	<author>Lord Byron II</author>
	<datestamp>1262353320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow. You missed the points I was trying to make.</p><p>1. Selling Core 2 Duo laptops with Windows 7 Professional is profitable for Microsoft and Intel.</p><p>2. Selling Atom netbooks with Windows XP is not as profitable.</p><p>So, as a result of 1 &amp; 2:</p><p>3. It's not surprising that Microsoft and Intel haven't put much effort into the netbook platform.</p><p>And as a result of 3:</p><p>4. The lack of development of the netbook platform will give other companies the room they need to innovate and bring new products to market.</p><p>None of it was a "typical rah-rah-Linux Microsoft Sucks" post, even if I knew what that means.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
You missed the points I was trying to make.1 .
Selling Core 2 Duo laptops with Windows 7 Professional is profitable for Microsoft and Intel.2 .
Selling Atom netbooks with Windows XP is not as profitable.So , as a result of 1 &amp; 2 : 3 .
It 's not surprising that Microsoft and Intel have n't put much effort into the netbook platform.And as a result of 3 : 4 .
The lack of development of the netbook platform will give other companies the room they need to innovate and bring new products to market.None of it was a " typical rah-rah-Linux Microsoft Sucks " post , even if I knew what that means .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
You missed the points I was trying to make.1.
Selling Core 2 Duo laptops with Windows 7 Professional is profitable for Microsoft and Intel.2.
Selling Atom netbooks with Windows XP is not as profitable.So, as a result of 1 &amp; 2:3.
It's not surprising that Microsoft and Intel haven't put much effort into the netbook platform.And as a result of 3:4.
The lack of development of the netbook platform will give other companies the room they need to innovate and bring new products to market.None of it was a "typical rah-rah-Linux Microsoft Sucks" post, even if I knew what that means.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30621288</id>
	<title>Re:I want a small light notebook</title>
	<author>clarkn0va</author>
	<datestamp>1262435640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've seen one great use for a netbook: For a year I did wireless internet installation, where I stood on 3 roofs per day, holding an aluminum pole with a yagi antenna on the end, slowly turning it and watching the radio's web interface for the best signal. Hard drives tend to freeze up around -18C, and a 7" screen hanging on a lanyard around the neck is a lot better than 14" under the arm when climbing a ladder or riding a boom with limited space. Unfortunately for me, the Eee was only introduced as I was leaving that job, so while my trainee got one, I was quite used to lugging around the much larger Compaq and a spare battery.</p><p>Other than that, I can't think of a good use for the things, and I'm quite happy with my 13" Timeline. Some pangs of envy since the 11.6" model was introduced with the same resolution, but the CULV+LED+SSD combination does not leave me wanting for speed or usability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen one great use for a netbook : For a year I did wireless internet installation , where I stood on 3 roofs per day , holding an aluminum pole with a yagi antenna on the end , slowly turning it and watching the radio 's web interface for the best signal .
Hard drives tend to freeze up around -18C , and a 7 " screen hanging on a lanyard around the neck is a lot better than 14 " under the arm when climbing a ladder or riding a boom with limited space .
Unfortunately for me , the Eee was only introduced as I was leaving that job , so while my trainee got one , I was quite used to lugging around the much larger Compaq and a spare battery.Other than that , I ca n't think of a good use for the things , and I 'm quite happy with my 13 " Timeline .
Some pangs of envy since the 11.6 " model was introduced with the same resolution , but the CULV + LED + SSD combination does not leave me wanting for speed or usability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen one great use for a netbook: For a year I did wireless internet installation, where I stood on 3 roofs per day, holding an aluminum pole with a yagi antenna on the end, slowly turning it and watching the radio's web interface for the best signal.
Hard drives tend to freeze up around -18C, and a 7" screen hanging on a lanyard around the neck is a lot better than 14" under the arm when climbing a ladder or riding a boom with limited space.
Unfortunately for me, the Eee was only introduced as I was leaving that job, so while my trainee got one, I was quite used to lugging around the much larger Compaq and a spare battery.Other than that, I can't think of a good use for the things, and I'm quite happy with my 13" Timeline.
Some pangs of envy since the 11.6" model was introduced with the same resolution, but the CULV+LED+SSD combination does not leave me wanting for speed or usability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30645848</id>
	<title>Netbooks stopped being netbooks in 2008</title>
	<author>guspasho</author>
	<datestamp>1262598300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is netbooks are no longer netbooks, and instead they are becoming watered-down laptops.</p><p>IMO a netbook should be durable and ultraportable, low footprint and no moving parts - day-long battery life, under 10 inches, under 3 lbs, passively-cooled, solid-state storage, built-in 3G. These things should be nonnegotiable standards (just like nobody builds a phone that can't fit in your pocket.) They should emphasize their specialty, which is that you can work from anywhere, or watch TV from anywhere (is HD video really necessary?) through various apps like YouTube. And the specs should be throttled back to maintain a low price point so long as the above features are kept to. That should have been the goal. Technology would allow for more powerful netbooks in time.</p><p>Instead, manufacturers have made durability and ultraportability negotiable and instead are making netbooks bigger, more powerful, and more expensive, and not trying very hard on the durability front. So they end up competing directly with laptops, which are coming down in price so rapidly that you can now buy a regular laptop for the same price as a netbook. Why would any consumer spend $500 for a system that uses an Atom, has 2GB RAM, 160GB HDD, 1024x600 screen, and 4 hour battery life when they can get a Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB HDD, much better screen resolution, and a slightly worse (advertised) battery life?</p><p>If it has a 3 hour battery life, a spinning HDD, and is 12 inches large, is it really a netbook anymore?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is netbooks are no longer netbooks , and instead they are becoming watered-down laptops.IMO a netbook should be durable and ultraportable , low footprint and no moving parts - day-long battery life , under 10 inches , under 3 lbs , passively-cooled , solid-state storage , built-in 3G .
These things should be nonnegotiable standards ( just like nobody builds a phone that ca n't fit in your pocket .
) They should emphasize their specialty , which is that you can work from anywhere , or watch TV from anywhere ( is HD video really necessary ?
) through various apps like YouTube .
And the specs should be throttled back to maintain a low price point so long as the above features are kept to .
That should have been the goal .
Technology would allow for more powerful netbooks in time.Instead , manufacturers have made durability and ultraportability negotiable and instead are making netbooks bigger , more powerful , and more expensive , and not trying very hard on the durability front .
So they end up competing directly with laptops , which are coming down in price so rapidly that you can now buy a regular laptop for the same price as a netbook .
Why would any consumer spend $ 500 for a system that uses an Atom , has 2GB RAM , 160GB HDD , 1024x600 screen , and 4 hour battery life when they can get a Core 2 Duo , 4GB RAM , 500GB HDD , much better screen resolution , and a slightly worse ( advertised ) battery life ? If it has a 3 hour battery life , a spinning HDD , and is 12 inches large , is it really a netbook anymore ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is netbooks are no longer netbooks, and instead they are becoming watered-down laptops.IMO a netbook should be durable and ultraportable, low footprint and no moving parts - day-long battery life, under 10 inches, under 3 lbs, passively-cooled, solid-state storage, built-in 3G.
These things should be nonnegotiable standards (just like nobody builds a phone that can't fit in your pocket.
) They should emphasize their specialty, which is that you can work from anywhere, or watch TV from anywhere (is HD video really necessary?
) through various apps like YouTube.
And the specs should be throttled back to maintain a low price point so long as the above features are kept to.
That should have been the goal.
Technology would allow for more powerful netbooks in time.Instead, manufacturers have made durability and ultraportability negotiable and instead are making netbooks bigger, more powerful, and more expensive, and not trying very hard on the durability front.
So they end up competing directly with laptops, which are coming down in price so rapidly that you can now buy a regular laptop for the same price as a netbook.
Why would any consumer spend $500 for a system that uses an Atom, has 2GB RAM, 160GB HDD, 1024x600 screen, and 4 hour battery life when they can get a Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB HDD, much better screen resolution, and a slightly worse (advertised) battery life?If it has a 3 hour battery life, a spinning HDD, and is 12 inches large, is it really a netbook anymore?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615682</id>
	<title>Re:Trust ARM</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1262378820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When is ARM going to release a 64-bit processor? Perhaps they should be concentrating on improving their CPU cores rather than trying to compete with GPU manufacturers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When is ARM going to release a 64-bit processor ?
Perhaps they should be concentrating on improving their CPU cores rather than trying to compete with GPU manufacturers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When is ARM going to release a 64-bit processor?
Perhaps they should be concentrating on improving their CPU cores rather than trying to compete with GPU manufacturers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615658</id>
	<title>Re:failure due to high cost, poor quality</title>
	<author>Deathlizard</author>
	<datestamp>1262378640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of that could be fixed with a Instant-on OS that bolts to the main OS, such as Splashtop. I find I use that often on my S10e for fast internet browsing, but can still boot into windows when I need to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of that could be fixed with a Instant-on OS that bolts to the main OS , such as Splashtop .
I find I use that often on my S10e for fast internet browsing , but can still boot into windows when I need to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of that could be fixed with a Instant-on OS that bolts to the main OS, such as Splashtop.
I find I use that often on my S10e for fast internet browsing, but can still boot into windows when I need to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616026</id>
	<title>People want cheap</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1262338680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>People want cheap laptops. Thats all they want. Yeah, netbooks are good because at the time they were -cheap-. Is there a market for ultra-portables? Yeah, there was before the netbook fad and will be afterwards. The thing is, at this time last year, if you wanted a $350 laptop, it would have to be a netbook. Today, you can get a laptop with a 15 inch screen and a CD/DVD drive for the same price.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People want cheap laptops .
Thats all they want .
Yeah , netbooks are good because at the time they were -cheap- .
Is there a market for ultra-portables ?
Yeah , there was before the netbook fad and will be afterwards .
The thing is , at this time last year , if you wanted a $ 350 laptop , it would have to be a netbook .
Today , you can get a laptop with a 15 inch screen and a CD/DVD drive for the same price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People want cheap laptops.
Thats all they want.
Yeah, netbooks are good because at the time they were -cheap-.
Is there a market for ultra-portables?
Yeah, there was before the netbook fad and will be afterwards.
The thing is, at this time last year, if you wanted a $350 laptop, it would have to be a netbook.
Today, you can get a laptop with a 15 inch screen and a CD/DVD drive for the same price.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616170</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>tubegeek</author>
	<datestamp>1262340240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed, very very much. Netbooks are so handy they will not be going anywhere any time soon - what will happen is cleverer and cleverer geeks will find ways to make them do more and more.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed , very very much .
Netbooks are so handy they will not be going anywhere any time soon - what will happen is cleverer and cleverer geeks will find ways to make them do more and more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed, very very much.
Netbooks are so handy they will not be going anywhere any time soon - what will happen is cleverer and cleverer geeks will find ways to make them do more and more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30621088</id>
	<title>A ram only netbook would work for me</title>
	<author>John.Banister</author>
	<datestamp>1262432880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want to carry my data on a fast terabyte micro sd card in my smartphone.  When I want the screen/keyboard/battery/ram/processing power, then I open the netbook (with the cpu &amp; ram behind the screen, and the crap collecting keyboard being easily replaceable) and put my smartphone on the wireless power supply spot.  The availability of the extra power turns on the UWB radio in the phone, and the phone's already running &amp; net connected OS starts using the new resources.  The netbook has two batteries, like the Motion Computing slates, so if I want more battery life, I can just bring more batteries &amp; swap 'em like it was a cordless drill.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want to carry my data on a fast terabyte micro sd card in my smartphone .
When I want the screen/keyboard/battery/ram/processing power , then I open the netbook ( with the cpu &amp; ram behind the screen , and the crap collecting keyboard being easily replaceable ) and put my smartphone on the wireless power supply spot .
The availability of the extra power turns on the UWB radio in the phone , and the phone 's already running &amp; net connected OS starts using the new resources .
The netbook has two batteries , like the Motion Computing slates , so if I want more battery life , I can just bring more batteries &amp; swap 'em like it was a cordless drill .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want to carry my data on a fast terabyte micro sd card in my smartphone.
When I want the screen/keyboard/battery/ram/processing power, then I open the netbook (with the cpu &amp; ram behind the screen, and the crap collecting keyboard being easily replaceable) and put my smartphone on the wireless power supply spot.
The availability of the extra power turns on the UWB radio in the phone, and the phone's already running &amp; net connected OS starts using the new resources.
The netbook has two batteries, like the Motion Computing slates, so if I want more battery life, I can just bring more batteries &amp; swap 'em like it was a cordless drill.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30622944</id>
	<title>Managing Expectations</title>
	<author>anyGould</author>
	<datestamp>1262452320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've got one of the Asus netbooks, and the keyboard, while a bit smaller than usual, is still big enough to work with. It runs everything I wanted it to (email, office suite) and a lot of stuff I wasn't expecting it to (Audacity, video editing, and a lot more games than I was expecting).</p><p>Lack of optical drive hasn't bugged me - I grabbed the Windows ISO reader, and have InfraReader on a USB stick in case I need to get a copy online. It's never been an issue for me.</p><p>Yes, it's smaller than a laptop - that's the point. My old machine was ten pounds with a 15" display. My new machine might only be 10" (widescreen) display, but it only weighs about three pounds, which means it goes a lot more places than the old one did. That means it gets a lot more use as well, which makes it more effective. And did I mention the six hour *minimum* battery life? (They advertise 8, but that's at bare-bones settings; I easily get 6 or so without noticing a tradeoff at all)</p><p>Of course, you do pay for that form factor (smaller monitor, smaller keyboard). But that's just the tradeoff to be made. There will always be a market for a simple ultraportable machine at a decent price point. (Yeah, I can get a "full" laptop for around 500, but maybe I don't want the extra couple size and weight). If anything kills the netbook, it'll be the tablets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got one of the Asus netbooks , and the keyboard , while a bit smaller than usual , is still big enough to work with .
It runs everything I wanted it to ( email , office suite ) and a lot of stuff I was n't expecting it to ( Audacity , video editing , and a lot more games than I was expecting ) .Lack of optical drive has n't bugged me - I grabbed the Windows ISO reader , and have InfraReader on a USB stick in case I need to get a copy online .
It 's never been an issue for me.Yes , it 's smaller than a laptop - that 's the point .
My old machine was ten pounds with a 15 " display .
My new machine might only be 10 " ( widescreen ) display , but it only weighs about three pounds , which means it goes a lot more places than the old one did .
That means it gets a lot more use as well , which makes it more effective .
And did I mention the six hour * minimum * battery life ?
( They advertise 8 , but that 's at bare-bones settings ; I easily get 6 or so without noticing a tradeoff at all ) Of course , you do pay for that form factor ( smaller monitor , smaller keyboard ) .
But that 's just the tradeoff to be made .
There will always be a market for a simple ultraportable machine at a decent price point .
( Yeah , I can get a " full " laptop for around 500 , but maybe I do n't want the extra couple size and weight ) .
If anything kills the netbook , it 'll be the tablets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got one of the Asus netbooks, and the keyboard, while a bit smaller than usual, is still big enough to work with.
It runs everything I wanted it to (email, office suite) and a lot of stuff I wasn't expecting it to (Audacity, video editing, and a lot more games than I was expecting).Lack of optical drive hasn't bugged me - I grabbed the Windows ISO reader, and have InfraReader on a USB stick in case I need to get a copy online.
It's never been an issue for me.Yes, it's smaller than a laptop - that's the point.
My old machine was ten pounds with a 15" display.
My new machine might only be 10" (widescreen) display, but it only weighs about three pounds, which means it goes a lot more places than the old one did.
That means it gets a lot more use as well, which makes it more effective.
And did I mention the six hour *minimum* battery life?
(They advertise 8, but that's at bare-bones settings; I easily get 6 or so without noticing a tradeoff at all)Of course, you do pay for that form factor (smaller monitor, smaller keyboard).
But that's just the tradeoff to be made.
There will always be a market for a simple ultraportable machine at a decent price point.
(Yeah, I can get a "full" laptop for around 500, but maybe I don't want the extra couple size and weight).
If anything kills the netbook, it'll be the tablets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615840</id>
	<title>Only idiots</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262337120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only idiots want "specialized" underpowered, cramped, horribly tiny devices like cellphones to do things a netbook should, and only idiots want huge overpowered laptops to do things a netbook can easily do.  Netbooks are the perfect middle ground between the two, and was the best idea to come along in portable computing in a LONG time.</p><p>Why is it that the only good things in technology in these modern times are ruined by idiots?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only idiots want " specialized " underpowered , cramped , horribly tiny devices like cellphones to do things a netbook should , and only idiots want huge overpowered laptops to do things a netbook can easily do .
Netbooks are the perfect middle ground between the two , and was the best idea to come along in portable computing in a LONG time.Why is it that the only good things in technology in these modern times are ruined by idiots ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only idiots want "specialized" underpowered, cramped, horribly tiny devices like cellphones to do things a netbook should, and only idiots want huge overpowered laptops to do things a netbook can easily do.
Netbooks are the perfect middle ground between the two, and was the best idea to come along in portable computing in a LONG time.Why is it that the only good things in technology in these modern times are ruined by idiots?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615754</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262379480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They've been predicting the "specialized computer" for 25 years now, and what's actually happened is that even specialized devices like cell phones and music players are in fact evolving towards becoming general computing platforms.  In other words, this guy is completely wrong.</p></div><p>Kindle?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 've been predicting the " specialized computer " for 25 years now , and what 's actually happened is that even specialized devices like cell phones and music players are in fact evolving towards becoming general computing platforms .
In other words , this guy is completely wrong.Kindle ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They've been predicting the "specialized computer" for 25 years now, and what's actually happened is that even specialized devices like cell phones and music players are in fact evolving towards becoming general computing platforms.
In other words, this guy is completely wrong.Kindle?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30637774</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit. It can never die.</title>
	<author>MrResistor</author>
	<datestamp>1262543400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love my smart phone, but would never do document editing or coding on it, both of which I do on my netbook every day. Similarly, I wouldn't make phone calls on my netbook. So no, those are two different niches, filled by two different devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love my smart phone , but would never do document editing or coding on it , both of which I do on my netbook every day .
Similarly , I would n't make phone calls on my netbook .
So no , those are two different niches , filled by two different devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love my smart phone, but would never do document editing or coding on it, both of which I do on my netbook every day.
Similarly, I wouldn't make phone calls on my netbook.
So no, those are two different niches, filled by two different devices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618582</id>
	<title>What I want, I can no longer find</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262358540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do have an ASUS EeePC netbook with a solid state flash drive.  It has 16GB and runs at a nice 88 MB/s.  The trouble is now, you can't find ANYTHING with an SSD, regardless of the size (of the SSD as long as it is at least 16GB, or the screen/etc).  I guess everyone still wants spinning metal platters that can be damaged by some strong impacts.  If I ever needed to replace this one, I couldn't as a new unit (have to go to EBay and hope someone will part with their precious baby).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do have an ASUS EeePC netbook with a solid state flash drive .
It has 16GB and runs at a nice 88 MB/s .
The trouble is now , you ca n't find ANYTHING with an SSD , regardless of the size ( of the SSD as long as it is at least 16GB , or the screen/etc ) .
I guess everyone still wants spinning metal platters that can be damaged by some strong impacts .
If I ever needed to replace this one , I could n't as a new unit ( have to go to EBay and hope someone will part with their precious baby ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do have an ASUS EeePC netbook with a solid state flash drive.
It has 16GB and runs at a nice 88 MB/s.
The trouble is now, you can't find ANYTHING with an SSD, regardless of the size (of the SSD as long as it is at least 16GB, or the screen/etc).
I guess everyone still wants spinning metal platters that can be damaged by some strong impacts.
If I ever needed to replace this one, I couldn't as a new unit (have to go to EBay and hope someone will part with their precious baby).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618590</id>
	<title>Re:No, they just aren't making Netbooks</title>
	<author>alvinrod</author>
	<datestamp>1262358540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think that the manufacturers realized that netbooks were an even faster race to the bottom with an even more razor-thin margin than the notebook space. They'd rather sell you a slightly higher-end machine, for which they can net a slightly higher profit. When Microsoft said they wanted to use Windows 7 to raise netbook prices it was a definite appeal to manufacturers who realized that cheap, low margin netbooks were cannibalizing their notebook sales.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that the manufacturers realized that netbooks were an even faster race to the bottom with an even more razor-thin margin than the notebook space .
They 'd rather sell you a slightly higher-end machine , for which they can net a slightly higher profit .
When Microsoft said they wanted to use Windows 7 to raise netbook prices it was a definite appeal to manufacturers who realized that cheap , low margin netbooks were cannibalizing their notebook sales .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that the manufacturers realized that netbooks were an even faster race to the bottom with an even more razor-thin margin than the notebook space.
They'd rather sell you a slightly higher-end machine, for which they can net a slightly higher profit.
When Microsoft said they wanted to use Windows 7 to raise netbook prices it was a definite appeal to manufacturers who realized that cheap, low margin netbooks were cannibalizing their notebook sales.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616104</id>
	<title>Wishful Thinking</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262339460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is just wishful thinking on the part of the manufacturers. "Consumers want power! They want specialization!" No, that's almost exactly the <em>opposite</em> of what consumers want, which is low cost and flexibility. Rather, uber-powerful, single purpose devices are the manufacturer's wet dream. They've been pushing that idea since the '90s, and if anything, the opposite has happened. Phones and gaming consoles are now more like general-purpose PCs than ever.
<br> <br>
If netbooks die, it won't be due to "technology changes," it'll be due to Microsoft and Intel doing everything in their power to kill them off, despite high consumer demand. This is a short-sighted, greedy move on their part, and if they don't offer what consumers want, then someone else will move in that will. This is why I think Chrome OS, despite its simplicity, will be huge. If nothing else, it'll light a fire under Microsoft's and Intel's feet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just wishful thinking on the part of the manufacturers .
" Consumers want power !
They want specialization !
" No , that 's almost exactly the opposite of what consumers want , which is low cost and flexibility .
Rather , uber-powerful , single purpose devices are the manufacturer 's wet dream .
They 've been pushing that idea since the '90s , and if anything , the opposite has happened .
Phones and gaming consoles are now more like general-purpose PCs than ever .
If netbooks die , it wo n't be due to " technology changes , " it 'll be due to Microsoft and Intel doing everything in their power to kill them off , despite high consumer demand .
This is a short-sighted , greedy move on their part , and if they do n't offer what consumers want , then someone else will move in that will .
This is why I think Chrome OS , despite its simplicity , will be huge .
If nothing else , it 'll light a fire under Microsoft 's and Intel 's feet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just wishful thinking on the part of the manufacturers.
"Consumers want power!
They want specialization!
" No, that's almost exactly the opposite of what consumers want, which is low cost and flexibility.
Rather, uber-powerful, single purpose devices are the manufacturer's wet dream.
They've been pushing that idea since the '90s, and if anything, the opposite has happened.
Phones and gaming consoles are now more like general-purpose PCs than ever.
If netbooks die, it won't be due to "technology changes," it'll be due to Microsoft and Intel doing everything in their power to kill them off, despite high consumer demand.
This is a short-sighted, greedy move on their part, and if they don't offer what consumers want, then someone else will move in that will.
This is why I think Chrome OS, despite its simplicity, will be huge.
If nothing else, it'll light a fire under Microsoft's and Intel's feet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617750</id>
	<title>Twitterpeek!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262353500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I completely agree with the guy. We need more specialized devices. Unfortunately clothing manufacturers are not keeping up with the number of pockets required for them but they will see the light.<br>Look at my gadget bag, its perfect, cell phone, Peek, Twitterpeek, Celio Redfly, iPod touch, Epson photo viewer, Canon ELPH digital camera and EeePC.  I can't wait for Peek to release Facepeek for Facebook!<br>I am also looking for Palm Fooleo on eBay. I dont understand why they have cancelled this device. It would be great seller and would help Palm much more than stupid Pre and WebOS.<br>I really need to buy more crappy ARM powered one function devices because my bag looks empty. Ian Drew, than you for your vision of the future, I can't wait!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I completely agree with the guy .
We need more specialized devices .
Unfortunately clothing manufacturers are not keeping up with the number of pockets required for them but they will see the light.Look at my gadget bag , its perfect , cell phone , Peek , Twitterpeek , Celio Redfly , iPod touch , Epson photo viewer , Canon ELPH digital camera and EeePC .
I ca n't wait for Peek to release Facepeek for Facebook ! I am also looking for Palm Fooleo on eBay .
I dont understand why they have cancelled this device .
It would be great seller and would help Palm much more than stupid Pre and WebOS.I really need to buy more crappy ARM powered one function devices because my bag looks empty .
Ian Drew , than you for your vision of the future , I ca n't wait !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I completely agree with the guy.
We need more specialized devices.
Unfortunately clothing manufacturers are not keeping up with the number of pockets required for them but they will see the light.Look at my gadget bag, its perfect, cell phone, Peek, Twitterpeek, Celio Redfly, iPod touch, Epson photo viewer, Canon ELPH digital camera and EeePC.
I can't wait for Peek to release Facepeek for Facebook!I am also looking for Palm Fooleo on eBay.
I dont understand why they have cancelled this device.
It would be great seller and would help Palm much more than stupid Pre and WebOS.I really need to buy more crappy ARM powered one function devices because my bag looks empty.
Ian Drew, than you for your vision of the future, I can't wait!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619306</id>
	<title>I call FUD</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1262365080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Consumers, he said, were chafing against the restrictions that using a netbook imposed on them.</p></div><p>That's been the situation since portable computers were invented.</p><p>What made netbooks seem like something new is not the hardware.  Cheap low-end laptops have been around for deaces.  The shift occurred because that a cheap laptop now serves 90\% of computing needs - the internet.  Yes, consumers will chafe against the 10\% of things they can't do on a netbook (games, video) but that doesn't mean that they won't keep buying netbooks.  That's like saying that because people don't like the pick-up in low-end cars, all cars will suddenly become high-end cars.  That's silly.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Consumers , he said , were chafing against the restrictions that using a netbook imposed on them.That 's been the situation since portable computers were invented.What made netbooks seem like something new is not the hardware .
Cheap low-end laptops have been around for deaces .
The shift occurred because that a cheap laptop now serves 90 \ % of computing needs - the internet .
Yes , consumers will chafe against the 10 \ % of things they ca n't do on a netbook ( games , video ) but that does n't mean that they wo n't keep buying netbooks .
That 's like saying that because people do n't like the pick-up in low-end cars , all cars will suddenly become high-end cars .
That 's silly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Consumers, he said, were chafing against the restrictions that using a netbook imposed on them.That's been the situation since portable computers were invented.What made netbooks seem like something new is not the hardware.
Cheap low-end laptops have been around for deaces.
The shift occurred because that a cheap laptop now serves 90\% of computing needs - the internet.
Yes, consumers will chafe against the 10\% of things they can't do on a netbook (games, video) but that doesn't mean that they won't keep buying netbooks.
That's like saying that because people don't like the pick-up in low-end cars, all cars will suddenly become high-end cars.
That's silly.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618666</id>
	<title>Re:Rising prices?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262359140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've bought an Aspire One A110L for 189 Euros new early last year here in Germany. Since then all netbooks start at 250 Euros + shipping at the lowest configuration while the very few exceptions are machines predating the A110L. Units with Linux preinstalled also have become virtually nonexisting. If Dell didn't exist both would look even worse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've bought an Aspire One A110L for 189 Euros new early last year here in Germany .
Since then all netbooks start at 250 Euros + shipping at the lowest configuration while the very few exceptions are machines predating the A110L .
Units with Linux preinstalled also have become virtually nonexisting .
If Dell did n't exist both would look even worse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've bought an Aspire One A110L for 189 Euros new early last year here in Germany.
Since then all netbooks start at 250 Euros + shipping at the lowest configuration while the very few exceptions are machines predating the A110L.
Units with Linux preinstalled also have become virtually nonexisting.
If Dell didn't exist both would look even worse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617480</id>
	<title>Desperately trying to stop $199 laptops.</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1262351880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
As others have pointed out, the anti-netbook push is a desperate attempt by manufacturers to prevent the computer industry from migrating to $199 laptops.  The EeePC was originally announced as a <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/157542/asusteks\_199\_laptop.html" title="pcworld.com">$199 laptop.</a> [pcworld.com] Massive efforts have been expended to stop that trend, by both Microsoft and Intel.  Microsoft, of course, frantically announced a life extension for Windows XP, with CPU speed and screen size restrictions designed to cripple "netbooks".   Intel actually has a screen size restriction for Atom-based netbooks.  (For a CPU manufacturer, that's sheer arrogance.) The netbook manufacturers were pressured to move away from Linux.  (The first generation of netbooks ware all Linux-based.)
</p><p>
It's been successful.  Since 2007, the price point for netbooks has moved up, not down.  Try searching on Amazon.
(Hint: search "netbook computers -case -cover -sleeve -stickers -skins -adapter -keyboard -screen -charger -drive -speaker -phone -accessory -komputerbay -battery -cable -mouse", then use the "Sort by lowest price" option. Amazon doesn't make it easy to find the cheapest product.) The cheapest is a <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Visual-Land-VL760-4GB-Widescreen-Netbook/dp/B002VAGE3Y/ref=sr\_1\_97?ie=UTF8&amp;s=electronics&amp;qid=1262390583&amp;sr=1-97" title="amazon.com">Visual Land 7" laptop</a> [amazon.com] at $149.  EeePC units now start at $249.
The cheapest new newbook on Google Shopping (which seems to be mostly a rehash of Amazon) is $229.  The cheapest netbook at WalMart is $278.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As others have pointed out , the anti-netbook push is a desperate attempt by manufacturers to prevent the computer industry from migrating to $ 199 laptops .
The EeePC was originally announced as a $ 199 laptop .
[ pcworld.com ] Massive efforts have been expended to stop that trend , by both Microsoft and Intel .
Microsoft , of course , frantically announced a life extension for Windows XP , with CPU speed and screen size restrictions designed to cripple " netbooks " .
Intel actually has a screen size restriction for Atom-based netbooks .
( For a CPU manufacturer , that 's sheer arrogance .
) The netbook manufacturers were pressured to move away from Linux .
( The first generation of netbooks ware all Linux-based .
) It 's been successful .
Since 2007 , the price point for netbooks has moved up , not down .
Try searching on Amazon .
( Hint : search " netbook computers -case -cover -sleeve -stickers -skins -adapter -keyboard -screen -charger -drive -speaker -phone -accessory -komputerbay -battery -cable -mouse " , then use the " Sort by lowest price " option .
Amazon does n't make it easy to find the cheapest product .
) The cheapest is a Visual Land 7 " laptop [ amazon.com ] at $ 149 .
EeePC units now start at $ 249 .
The cheapest new newbook on Google Shopping ( which seems to be mostly a rehash of Amazon ) is $ 229 .
The cheapest netbook at WalMart is $ 278 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
As others have pointed out, the anti-netbook push is a desperate attempt by manufacturers to prevent the computer industry from migrating to $199 laptops.
The EeePC was originally announced as a $199 laptop.
[pcworld.com] Massive efforts have been expended to stop that trend, by both Microsoft and Intel.
Microsoft, of course, frantically announced a life extension for Windows XP, with CPU speed and screen size restrictions designed to cripple "netbooks".
Intel actually has a screen size restriction for Atom-based netbooks.
(For a CPU manufacturer, that's sheer arrogance.
) The netbook manufacturers were pressured to move away from Linux.
(The first generation of netbooks ware all Linux-based.
)

It's been successful.
Since 2007, the price point for netbooks has moved up, not down.
Try searching on Amazon.
(Hint: search "netbook computers -case -cover -sleeve -stickers -skins -adapter -keyboard -screen -charger -drive -speaker -phone -accessory -komputerbay -battery -cable -mouse", then use the "Sort by lowest price" option.
Amazon doesn't make it easy to find the cheapest product.
) The cheapest is a Visual Land 7" laptop [amazon.com] at $149.
EeePC units now start at $249.
The cheapest new newbook on Google Shopping (which seems to be mostly a rehash of Amazon) is $229.
The cheapest netbook at WalMart is $278.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616290</id>
	<title>Re:Netbooks fail in one point</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1262341680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>battery life!</p></div><p>Really? You mean, all those netbooks that give you 6 to 8 hours of battery life (and there's more than one; Google around!) are a figment of my imagination? Or, perhaps, you can show me a full-sized laptop that can last for 8 hours?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>battery life ! Really ?
You mean , all those netbooks that give you 6 to 8 hours of battery life ( and there 's more than one ; Google around !
) are a figment of my imagination ?
Or , perhaps , you can show me a full-sized laptop that can last for 8 hours ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>battery life!Really?
You mean, all those netbooks that give you 6 to 8 hours of battery life (and there's more than one; Google around!
) are a figment of my imagination?
Or, perhaps, you can show me a full-sized laptop that can last for 8 hours?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615558</id>
	<title>Re:failure due to high cost, poor quality</title>
	<author>FatSean</author>
	<datestamp>1262377440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While the touchpad on our Eeepc 1005HA is indeed annoying, a $15 mini wireless mouse cleaned that up.  The low vertical resolution is just part of the packaging if you want a physically small device.  We run browsers full screen and it's great.  I dunno what the boot time is, we've only booted it a few times.  Hibernate works great and it resumes in seconds with the OEM XP installation.</p><p>I think you are whinging about a device not designed for you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While the touchpad on our Eeepc 1005HA is indeed annoying , a $ 15 mini wireless mouse cleaned that up .
The low vertical resolution is just part of the packaging if you want a physically small device .
We run browsers full screen and it 's great .
I dunno what the boot time is , we 've only booted it a few times .
Hibernate works great and it resumes in seconds with the OEM XP installation.I think you are whinging about a device not designed for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the touchpad on our Eeepc 1005HA is indeed annoying, a $15 mini wireless mouse cleaned that up.
The low vertical resolution is just part of the packaging if you want a physically small device.
We run browsers full screen and it's great.
I dunno what the boot time is, we've only booted it a few times.
Hibernate works great and it resumes in seconds with the OEM XP installation.I think you are whinging about a device not designed for you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615918</id>
	<title>What's the difference...</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1262337840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is the 12.1" powerbook I have on my desk retroactively a netbook?  Other than the fact it does have an optical drive?  Now I see some "netbooks" with 11.6" screens and are only $50 less than the 15" "laptops" setting right next to them with a full sized keyboard, a better processor, and more RAM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the 12.1 " powerbook I have on my desk retroactively a netbook ?
Other than the fact it does have an optical drive ?
Now I see some " netbooks " with 11.6 " screens and are only $ 50 less than the 15 " " laptops " setting right next to them with a full sized keyboard , a better processor , and more RAM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the 12.1" powerbook I have on my desk retroactively a netbook?
Other than the fact it does have an optical drive?
Now I see some "netbooks" with 11.6" screens and are only $50 less than the 15" "laptops" setting right next to them with a full sized keyboard, a better processor, and more RAM.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620612</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>Mista2</author>
	<datestamp>1262425140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've got a netbook that I can use for mail, calendar, websurfing, some games, has a touch screen, wifi, 3G cellular data, 16GB of local storage, I can place voice phone calls over cell when roaming, VoIP calls when I have wifi, batterly lasts most of the day, runs Unix and cost me less than NZ$600 - Apple just call it an iPhone though, not a netbook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got a netbook that I can use for mail , calendar , websurfing , some games , has a touch screen , wifi , 3G cellular data , 16GB of local storage , I can place voice phone calls over cell when roaming , VoIP calls when I have wifi , batterly lasts most of the day , runs Unix and cost me less than NZ $ 600 - Apple just call it an iPhone though , not a netbook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got a netbook that I can use for mail, calendar, websurfing, some games, has a touch screen, wifi, 3G cellular data, 16GB of local storage, I can place voice phone calls over cell when roaming, VoIP calls when I have wifi, batterly lasts most of the day, runs Unix and cost me less than NZ$600 - Apple just call it an iPhone though, not a netbook.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616870</id>
	<title>Re:Rising prices?</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1262347020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I saw a EEE 1005HA for for $249.99 on NCIX.</p><p>And there's that Cherrypal $99 USD netbook, so clearly prices can come down further. And with rock-bottom prices like that, who wouldn't buy if they could find a use for it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw a EEE 1005HA for for $ 249.99 on NCIX.And there 's that Cherrypal $ 99 USD netbook , so clearly prices can come down further .
And with rock-bottom prices like that , who would n't buy if they could find a use for it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw a EEE 1005HA for for $249.99 on NCIX.And there's that Cherrypal $99 USD netbook, so clearly prices can come down further.
And with rock-bottom prices like that, who wouldn't buy if they could find a use for it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617538</id>
	<title>I don't want a cheap laptop</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1262352180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want a small one that is easy to carry.</p><p>I am sure I am not alone.</p><p>I don't need 15inch screen, neither do I need CD/DVD drive!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want a small one that is easy to carry.I am sure I am not alone.I do n't need 15inch screen , neither do I need CD/DVD drive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want a small one that is easy to carry.I am sure I am not alone.I don't need 15inch screen, neither do I need CD/DVD drive!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619054</id>
	<title>Re:No, they just aren't making Netbooks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262362500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Linux netbook was discarded because it didn't sell.</p></div><p>Really troll?  So I guess Dell was lying when they said 30 percent of their netbooks sell with Linux on them and the returns are the same as the Windows models.</p><p>

Fucking troll pos motherfucker.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Linux netbook was discarded because it did n't sell.Really troll ?
So I guess Dell was lying when they said 30 percent of their netbooks sell with Linux on them and the returns are the same as the Windows models .
Fucking troll pos motherfucker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Linux netbook was discarded because it didn't sell.Really troll?
So I guess Dell was lying when they said 30 percent of their netbooks sell with Linux on them and the returns are the same as the Windows models.
Fucking troll pos motherfucker.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616410</id>
	<title>niche</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262342880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tiny Screens, almost unusable trackpads (why?), so underpowered they barely browse the web.  The biggest advantage I hear is they are easy to carry around, but my wifes 13" mbp in a slim vertical messenger carries like a purse, and has realistic screen real estate with a fantastic keyboard and mouse.  The price advantage is not enough to maintain sales growth given the limitations for the majority of people (do realize most<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.'rs are not typical).  Judging only by the buzz from friends and blogs it feels like we are already on the top or backside of the curve.  Netbooks will remain a niche product for the foreseeable future. Do keep in mind there is nothing wrong with a really nice niche.  (from an MBA and that writes code for a living)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tiny Screens , almost unusable trackpads ( why ?
) , so underpowered they barely browse the web .
The biggest advantage I hear is they are easy to carry around , but my wifes 13 " mbp in a slim vertical messenger carries like a purse , and has realistic screen real estate with a fantastic keyboard and mouse .
The price advantage is not enough to maintain sales growth given the limitations for the majority of people ( do realize most / .
'rs are not typical ) .
Judging only by the buzz from friends and blogs it feels like we are already on the top or backside of the curve .
Netbooks will remain a niche product for the foreseeable future .
Do keep in mind there is nothing wrong with a really nice niche .
( from an MBA and that writes code for a living )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tiny Screens, almost unusable trackpads (why?
), so underpowered they barely browse the web.
The biggest advantage I hear is they are easy to carry around, but my wifes 13" mbp in a slim vertical messenger carries like a purse, and has realistic screen real estate with a fantastic keyboard and mouse.
The price advantage is not enough to maintain sales growth given the limitations for the majority of people (do realize most /.
'rs are not typical).
Judging only by the buzz from friends and blogs it feels like we are already on the top or backside of the curve.
Netbooks will remain a niche product for the foreseeable future.
Do keep in mind there is nothing wrong with a really nice niche.
(from an MBA and that writes code for a living)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616772</id>
	<title>Re:Blame Intel... and the manufacturers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262346180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have never bought a laptop because they are not portable: they weigh far too much, they mostly last less than two hours on battery, and they are much to expensive to lose. I bought a 10 inch Eee PC without an OS for 225 Euros and I already had Ubuntu on a USB stick so, in just 30-minutes, I had a perfect nomadic computer: no viruses, Skype, sensitive wireless, SD slot a battery life of 5+ hours, tiny efficient power adapter, plus all the wonderful free applications that comes with Ubuntu for editing photos, surfing the Web, copying up to my web server etc.  An expensive windows laptops just cannot do any of this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have never bought a laptop because they are not portable : they weigh far too much , they mostly last less than two hours on battery , and they are much to expensive to lose .
I bought a 10 inch Eee PC without an OS for 225 Euros and I already had Ubuntu on a USB stick so , in just 30-minutes , I had a perfect nomadic computer : no viruses , Skype , sensitive wireless , SD slot a battery life of 5 + hours , tiny efficient power adapter , plus all the wonderful free applications that comes with Ubuntu for editing photos , surfing the Web , copying up to my web server etc .
An expensive windows laptops just can not do any of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have never bought a laptop because they are not portable: they weigh far too much, they mostly last less than two hours on battery, and they are much to expensive to lose.
I bought a 10 inch Eee PC without an OS for 225 Euros and I already had Ubuntu on a USB stick so, in just 30-minutes, I had a perfect nomadic computer: no viruses, Skype, sensitive wireless, SD slot a battery life of 5+ hours, tiny efficient power adapter, plus all the wonderful free applications that comes with Ubuntu for editing photos, surfing the Web, copying up to my web server etc.
An expensive windows laptops just cannot do any of this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616226</id>
	<title>Re:No, they just aren't making Netbooks</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1262340900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The problem is the things that make a netbook so desirable by a lot of people - amazing battery life and small form factor - are being discarded by hardware makers</i> </p><p>The Linux netbook was discarded because it didn't sell.</p><p>It's worth considering the possibility that the market may be rebelling against the small screen and awkward keyboard of the netbook.</p><p> That the netbook experience isn't so amazing the second or third year out.</p><p>Perhaps particularly so for the older adult.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is the things that make a netbook so desirable by a lot of people - amazing battery life and small form factor - are being discarded by hardware makers The Linux netbook was discarded because it did n't sell.It 's worth considering the possibility that the market may be rebelling against the small screen and awkward keyboard of the netbook .
That the netbook experience is n't so amazing the second or third year out.Perhaps particularly so for the older adult .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is the things that make a netbook so desirable by a lot of people - amazing battery life and small form factor - are being discarded by hardware makers The Linux netbook was discarded because it didn't sell.It's worth considering the possibility that the market may be rebelling against the small screen and awkward keyboard of the netbook.
That the netbook experience isn't so amazing the second or third year out.Perhaps particularly so for the older adult.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615740</id>
	<title>The netbooks have been "killing themselves"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262379420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Over the past two years, netbooks have been getting larger in size and more expensive, whilst retaining the all-around same specifications. Once the price goes above $300 and the screen goes above 9 inches, I might as well get a cheap laptop.</p><p>I picked up my EEEPC 900 HA when it was $258 and I feel I got an excellent deal. Apparently Amazon agrees with me, because now that model is *MORE* expensive than it was. This device is small, has a big hard drive, and does what I need it to on the go. if I wanted a bigger machine, I would toat this laptop around with it's 4 gigs of RAM and an NVIDIA GPU.</p><p>Although I use Linux, I am not one of those fanboys who goes around saying that netbooks should consist of only a web browser. I expect a fully functional tiny PC at a low price with reasonable specifications.</p><p>As for smart phones, I'm not interested. I don't want to be chained to a contract and I expect to have control over my own hardware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Over the past two years , netbooks have been getting larger in size and more expensive , whilst retaining the all-around same specifications .
Once the price goes above $ 300 and the screen goes above 9 inches , I might as well get a cheap laptop.I picked up my EEEPC 900 HA when it was $ 258 and I feel I got an excellent deal .
Apparently Amazon agrees with me , because now that model is * MORE * expensive than it was .
This device is small , has a big hard drive , and does what I need it to on the go .
if I wanted a bigger machine , I would toat this laptop around with it 's 4 gigs of RAM and an NVIDIA GPU.Although I use Linux , I am not one of those fanboys who goes around saying that netbooks should consist of only a web browser .
I expect a fully functional tiny PC at a low price with reasonable specifications.As for smart phones , I 'm not interested .
I do n't want to be chained to a contract and I expect to have control over my own hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over the past two years, netbooks have been getting larger in size and more expensive, whilst retaining the all-around same specifications.
Once the price goes above $300 and the screen goes above 9 inches, I might as well get a cheap laptop.I picked up my EEEPC 900 HA when it was $258 and I feel I got an excellent deal.
Apparently Amazon agrees with me, because now that model is *MORE* expensive than it was.
This device is small, has a big hard drive, and does what I need it to on the go.
if I wanted a bigger machine, I would toat this laptop around with it's 4 gigs of RAM and an NVIDIA GPU.Although I use Linux, I am not one of those fanboys who goes around saying that netbooks should consist of only a web browser.
I expect a fully functional tiny PC at a low price with reasonable specifications.As for smart phones, I'm not interested.
I don't want to be chained to a contract and I expect to have control over my own hardware.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572</id>
	<title>No, they just aren't making Netbooks</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1262377560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is the things that make a netbook so desirable by a lot of people - amazing battery life and small form factor - are being discarded by hardware makers.  They are insisting consumers want more powerful devices, so they are beefing up processor and memory which eats into battery life.  Similarly, they are insisting users need larger screens which increases form factor and also eats into battery life.</p><p>So basically hardware makers are wandering into small laptop territory, when I'm not sure the core Netbook market is really moving at all - it's just the hardware makers are moving away from it and finding people don't want what they are making as much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is the things that make a netbook so desirable by a lot of people - amazing battery life and small form factor - are being discarded by hardware makers .
They are insisting consumers want more powerful devices , so they are beefing up processor and memory which eats into battery life .
Similarly , they are insisting users need larger screens which increases form factor and also eats into battery life.So basically hardware makers are wandering into small laptop territory , when I 'm not sure the core Netbook market is really moving at all - it 's just the hardware makers are moving away from it and finding people do n't want what they are making as much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is the things that make a netbook so desirable by a lot of people - amazing battery life and small form factor - are being discarded by hardware makers.
They are insisting consumers want more powerful devices, so they are beefing up processor and memory which eats into battery life.
Similarly, they are insisting users need larger screens which increases form factor and also eats into battery life.So basically hardware makers are wandering into small laptop territory, when I'm not sure the core Netbook market is really moving at all - it's just the hardware makers are moving away from it and finding people don't want what they are making as much.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620520</id>
	<title>Re:Netbook weirdness</title>
	<author>narcc</author>
	<datestamp>1262423880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I can't believe I am the only person in the world who does not need a fast machine.</p></div><p>Well, you're very much not alone -- though I'd guess that your netbook IS a fast machine.  I'd say it's likely faster than the average 5-year old computer.</p><p>I don't know about you, but my computing needs haven't changed much, if at all, in the last 10 years -- and my netbook would certainly be considered a high-end computer 10 years ago (hell, you couldn't buy a computer with specs that high in 2000!).  Even 5 years ago it would be considered a top model.  Hell, my netbook has better specs than my old laptop from 2006.</p><p>I found this old post on google answers from October 2004 -- what an average computer ought to be:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Recommended Specifications for software developed today can be<br>anything from 1.4 Ghz, 256 mb DDR, 128mb 3D Card (Directx<br>Compatible.), 16x + CD-Rom.</p></div><p>Check it out: <a href="http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=414355" title="google.com">Specs from 2004</a> [google.com]  It really puts the power of your netbook in perspective -- October 2004 wasn't very long ago at all.  How have your computing needs changed in that time?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't believe I am the only person in the world who does not need a fast machine.Well , you 're very much not alone -- though I 'd guess that your netbook IS a fast machine .
I 'd say it 's likely faster than the average 5-year old computer.I do n't know about you , but my computing needs have n't changed much , if at all , in the last 10 years -- and my netbook would certainly be considered a high-end computer 10 years ago ( hell , you could n't buy a computer with specs that high in 2000 ! ) .
Even 5 years ago it would be considered a top model .
Hell , my netbook has better specs than my old laptop from 2006.I found this old post on google answers from October 2004 -- what an average computer ought to be : Recommended Specifications for software developed today can beanything from 1.4 Ghz , 256 mb DDR , 128mb 3D Card ( DirectxCompatible .
) , 16x + CD-Rom.Check it out : Specs from 2004 [ google.com ] It really puts the power of your netbook in perspective -- October 2004 was n't very long ago at all .
How have your computing needs changed in that time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't believe I am the only person in the world who does not need a fast machine.Well, you're very much not alone -- though I'd guess that your netbook IS a fast machine.
I'd say it's likely faster than the average 5-year old computer.I don't know about you, but my computing needs haven't changed much, if at all, in the last 10 years -- and my netbook would certainly be considered a high-end computer 10 years ago (hell, you couldn't buy a computer with specs that high in 2000!).
Even 5 years ago it would be considered a top model.
Hell, my netbook has better specs than my old laptop from 2006.I found this old post on google answers from October 2004 -- what an average computer ought to be:Recommended Specifications for software developed today can beanything from 1.4 Ghz, 256 mb DDR, 128mb 3D Card (DirectxCompatible.
), 16x + CD-Rom.Check it out: Specs from 2004 [google.com]  It really puts the power of your netbook in perspective -- October 2004 wasn't very long ago at all.
How have your computing needs changed in that time?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617148</id>
	<title>Re:failure due to high cost, poor quality</title>
	<author>Reservoir Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1262349240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I absolutely lover my HP Mini 110 netbook, but since they all pretty much have identical features I would probably love any other netbook. Prior to the netbook revolution if I wanted a light, small notebook that I could caryy for hours in my backpack I would have had to buy a $2000+ Sony Vaio Notebook. Netbooks changed eveything. My netbook perfectly handles the Web, non-HD movies, reading my ebooks, document editing. I have not yet ran into limitation of the N230 single-core Atom.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I absolutely lover my HP Mini 110 netbook , but since they all pretty much have identical features I would probably love any other netbook .
Prior to the netbook revolution if I wanted a light , small notebook that I could caryy for hours in my backpack I would have had to buy a $ 2000 + Sony Vaio Notebook .
Netbooks changed eveything .
My netbook perfectly handles the Web , non-HD movies , reading my ebooks , document editing .
I have not yet ran into limitation of the N230 single-core Atom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I absolutely lover my HP Mini 110 netbook, but since they all pretty much have identical features I would probably love any other netbook.
Prior to the netbook revolution if I wanted a light, small notebook that I could caryy for hours in my backpack I would have had to buy a $2000+ Sony Vaio Notebook.
Netbooks changed eveything.
My netbook perfectly handles the Web, non-HD movies, reading my ebooks, document editing.
I have not yet ran into limitation of the N230 single-core Atom.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619602</id>
	<title>phones could replace netbooks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262368860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if we had a compact wireless keyboard and next generation (in terms of resolution) wired or wireless glasses... that would solve the typing and larger-visibility-for-using-apps issues...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if we had a compact wireless keyboard and next generation ( in terms of resolution ) wired or wireless glasses... that would solve the typing and larger-visibility-for-using-apps issues.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if we had a compact wireless keyboard and next generation (in terms of resolution) wired or wireless glasses... that would solve the typing and larger-visibility-for-using-apps issues...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616654</id>
	<title>Re:predicted convergence unlikely</title>
	<author>Lvdata</author>
	<datestamp>1262345100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That is only true if you need a PHYSCAL keyboard and display. A small brick the size of a Iphone, with a Laser Keyboard <a href="http://www.virtual-laser-keyboard.com/" title="virtual-la...yboard.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.virtual-laser-keyboard.com/</a> [virtual-la...yboard.com] and Pico Display <a href="http://www.microvision.com/pico\_projector\_displays/" title="microvision.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.microvision.com/pico\_projector\_displays/</a> [microvision.com] would allow for multiple options. I agree that a non-tactile keyboard is not the best, but for light web surfing/email it would work. It would have 3 modes.
<br>
1. An Iphone like slate, with a on a screen (3.5" built in physical screen) keyboard, when there are not a convenient surface.
<br>
2. A projection keyboard and display
<br>
3. At home/work where you need a full keyboard and a high quality display with a wireless link to both.
<br>
I leave getting that into a iphone size for a reasonable amount of money up to the engineers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is only true if you need a PHYSCAL keyboard and display .
A small brick the size of a Iphone , with a Laser Keyboard http : //www.virtual-laser-keyboard.com/ [ virtual-la...yboard.com ] and Pico Display http : //www.microvision.com/pico \ _projector \ _displays/ [ microvision.com ] would allow for multiple options .
I agree that a non-tactile keyboard is not the best , but for light web surfing/email it would work .
It would have 3 modes .
1. An Iphone like slate , with a on a screen ( 3.5 " built in physical screen ) keyboard , when there are not a convenient surface .
2. A projection keyboard and display 3 .
At home/work where you need a full keyboard and a high quality display with a wireless link to both .
I leave getting that into a iphone size for a reasonable amount of money up to the engineers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is only true if you need a PHYSCAL keyboard and display.
A small brick the size of a Iphone, with a Laser Keyboard http://www.virtual-laser-keyboard.com/ [virtual-la...yboard.com] and Pico Display http://www.microvision.com/pico\_projector\_displays/ [microvision.com] would allow for multiple options.
I agree that a non-tactile keyboard is not the best, but for light web surfing/email it would work.
It would have 3 modes.
1. An Iphone like slate, with a on a screen (3.5" built in physical screen) keyboard, when there are not a convenient surface.
2. A projection keyboard and display

3.
At home/work where you need a full keyboard and a high quality display with a wireless link to both.
I leave getting that into a iphone size for a reasonable amount of money up to the engineers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617184</id>
	<title>Re:No, they just aren't making Netbooks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262349480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only people that are ok with the form factor and power of the original netbooks are geeks, and most manufacturers aren't going to support a product line for such a small percentage of prospective buyers.  Joe Sixpack might think that the netbook at Wal-Mart is cute, but when he gets it home and figures out that it's crippled he won't be happy at all.  Basically, average consumers do want more powerful devices.  They don't want Youtube to be stuttering while they're watching teh kittenz.  Hell, I'm a geek, but I still wish hulu worked better on my netbook.  Consumers want everything and they want it for free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only people that are ok with the form factor and power of the original netbooks are geeks , and most manufacturers are n't going to support a product line for such a small percentage of prospective buyers .
Joe Sixpack might think that the netbook at Wal-Mart is cute , but when he gets it home and figures out that it 's crippled he wo n't be happy at all .
Basically , average consumers do want more powerful devices .
They do n't want Youtube to be stuttering while they 're watching teh kittenz .
Hell , I 'm a geek , but I still wish hulu worked better on my netbook .
Consumers want everything and they want it for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only people that are ok with the form factor and power of the original netbooks are geeks, and most manufacturers aren't going to support a product line for such a small percentage of prospective buyers.
Joe Sixpack might think that the netbook at Wal-Mart is cute, but when he gets it home and figures out that it's crippled he won't be happy at all.
Basically, average consumers do want more powerful devices.
They don't want Youtube to be stuttering while they're watching teh kittenz.
Hell, I'm a geek, but I still wish hulu worked better on my netbook.
Consumers want everything and they want it for free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615370</id>
	<title>Trust ARM</title>
	<author>WiiVault</author>
	<datestamp>1262375880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>ARM has always been smart both in design as well as production (via licensees). While Intel gets all the press ARM is stealing the show and marketshare.</htmltext>
<tokenext>ARM has always been smart both in design as well as production ( via licensees ) .
While Intel gets all the press ARM is stealing the show and marketshare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ARM has always been smart both in design as well as production (via licensees).
While Intel gets all the press ARM is stealing the show and marketshare.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615566</id>
	<title>Amen.</title>
	<author>insufflate10mg</author>
	<datestamp>1262377560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My exact same thoughts as I read the summary/article; why would netbooks fade away? They fill a gap that must be filled: an ultra-portable computer. Laptops are not the same, and phones have nowhere near the capabilities for a lot of people. Yes, mobile phones are getting more and more technologically advanced by the quarter, and yes, I'm loving every bit of it, but netbooks will still hold their own.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My exact same thoughts as I read the summary/article ; why would netbooks fade away ?
They fill a gap that must be filled : an ultra-portable computer .
Laptops are not the same , and phones have nowhere near the capabilities for a lot of people .
Yes , mobile phones are getting more and more technologically advanced by the quarter , and yes , I 'm loving every bit of it , but netbooks will still hold their own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My exact same thoughts as I read the summary/article; why would netbooks fade away?
They fill a gap that must be filled: an ultra-portable computer.
Laptops are not the same, and phones have nowhere near the capabilities for a lot of people.
Yes, mobile phones are getting more and more technologically advanced by the quarter, and yes, I'm loving every bit of it, but netbooks will still hold their own.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615384</id>
	<title>Rising prices?</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1262376000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's he talking about?  The Wikipedia says the Eee PC was introduced at a price of $399 US.  Taking a wander around the racks at the local electronics retailer suggests that the average netbook, which has considerably better specs than the Eee is priced around $300-$350 CAN, which some being as cheap as $250 CAN.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's he talking about ?
The Wikipedia says the Eee PC was introduced at a price of $ 399 US .
Taking a wander around the racks at the local electronics retailer suggests that the average netbook , which has considerably better specs than the Eee is priced around $ 300- $ 350 CAN , which some being as cheap as $ 250 CAN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's he talking about?
The Wikipedia says the Eee PC was introduced at a price of $399 US.
Taking a wander around the racks at the local electronics retailer suggests that the average netbook, which has considerably better specs than the Eee is priced around $300-$350 CAN, which some being as cheap as $250 CAN.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616666</id>
	<title>Re:Trust ARM</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1262345160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, what?  ARM isn't trying to compete with GPU manufacturers.  Most ARM SoCs come with a GPU from someone like PowerVR.  ARM doesn't design GPU cores.  As for 64-bit processors, there's not yet any reason to.  Everyone wants to move to 64 bit on x86 not for the larger word size, but for the fact that the ISA is a bit more sane (more GPRs, fewer restrictions on target and destination registers, simpler memory model) giving an overall speed benefit.  </p><p>
On other architectures, this is irrelevant.  The only time you'll need a 64-bit CPU if you've got a sane architecture is when you want more than 4GB of virtual address space.  Given that current handhelds come with at most 256MB of RAM, and most don't enable swap (or, if they do, only about 64MB of it), this isn't likely to be an issue for a few years.  </p><p>
Adding addressing extensions to the ARM ISA to allow more than 4GB of physical memory might be useful then, but even now very few processes use more than 4GB of address space.  On my current (64-bit) system, the largest of the 128 processes that I have running is using 1.17GB of virtual address space, the next largest is 564MB.  None of the processes benefit from being 64-bit, they just benefit from the other changes to the ISA.  They would actually be faster if pointers were still 32 bits wide and they managed to keep the other advantages of the architecture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , what ?
ARM is n't trying to compete with GPU manufacturers .
Most ARM SoCs come with a GPU from someone like PowerVR .
ARM does n't design GPU cores .
As for 64-bit processors , there 's not yet any reason to .
Everyone wants to move to 64 bit on x86 not for the larger word size , but for the fact that the ISA is a bit more sane ( more GPRs , fewer restrictions on target and destination registers , simpler memory model ) giving an overall speed benefit .
On other architectures , this is irrelevant .
The only time you 'll need a 64-bit CPU if you 've got a sane architecture is when you want more than 4GB of virtual address space .
Given that current handhelds come with at most 256MB of RAM , and most do n't enable swap ( or , if they do , only about 64MB of it ) , this is n't likely to be an issue for a few years .
Adding addressing extensions to the ARM ISA to allow more than 4GB of physical memory might be useful then , but even now very few processes use more than 4GB of address space .
On my current ( 64-bit ) system , the largest of the 128 processes that I have running is using 1.17GB of virtual address space , the next largest is 564MB .
None of the processes benefit from being 64-bit , they just benefit from the other changes to the ISA .
They would actually be faster if pointers were still 32 bits wide and they managed to keep the other advantages of the architecture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, what?
ARM isn't trying to compete with GPU manufacturers.
Most ARM SoCs come with a GPU from someone like PowerVR.
ARM doesn't design GPU cores.
As for 64-bit processors, there's not yet any reason to.
Everyone wants to move to 64 bit on x86 not for the larger word size, but for the fact that the ISA is a bit more sane (more GPRs, fewer restrictions on target and destination registers, simpler memory model) giving an overall speed benefit.
On other architectures, this is irrelevant.
The only time you'll need a 64-bit CPU if you've got a sane architecture is when you want more than 4GB of virtual address space.
Given that current handhelds come with at most 256MB of RAM, and most don't enable swap (or, if they do, only about 64MB of it), this isn't likely to be an issue for a few years.
Adding addressing extensions to the ARM ISA to allow more than 4GB of physical memory might be useful then, but even now very few processes use more than 4GB of address space.
On my current (64-bit) system, the largest of the 128 processes that I have running is using 1.17GB of virtual address space, the next largest is 564MB.
None of the processes benefit from being 64-bit, they just benefit from the other changes to the ISA.
They would actually be faster if pointers were still 32 bits wide and they managed to keep the other advantages of the architecture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615730</id>
	<title>Here we go again...Arm had their chance</title>
	<author>grapeape</author>
	<datestamp>1262379360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't we go through this already?  Arm made their push with PDA's  then pushed their demise with the declaration that everyone wanted all their gadgets integrated.  Now they claim everyone wants their gadgets separate and specific?  Guess their original world domination plans didn't work out quite the way they wanted?</p><p>While I agree that the netbook as it is now will change and evolve, there is now a proven niche for low-mid cost devices that can do basic computer tasks, features and abilities will increase but I don't see this market segment going away.  There are plenty of us that like the idea of a kindle for instance but find it too limited in what it can do, tablets seem like the natural progression.  I know they have been tried before, but integration in the past wasn't nearly at the level it is now and cost of production and ownership kept the really good ones out of the hands of mainstream consumers.  Perhaps improvements in communication, power consumption, quality, speed and costs have advanced us to the point that Star-Trek like data tablet is finally ready for prime time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't we go through this already ?
Arm made their push with PDA 's then pushed their demise with the declaration that everyone wanted all their gadgets integrated .
Now they claim everyone wants their gadgets separate and specific ?
Guess their original world domination plans did n't work out quite the way they wanted ? While I agree that the netbook as it is now will change and evolve , there is now a proven niche for low-mid cost devices that can do basic computer tasks , features and abilities will increase but I do n't see this market segment going away .
There are plenty of us that like the idea of a kindle for instance but find it too limited in what it can do , tablets seem like the natural progression .
I know they have been tried before , but integration in the past was n't nearly at the level it is now and cost of production and ownership kept the really good ones out of the hands of mainstream consumers .
Perhaps improvements in communication , power consumption , quality , speed and costs have advanced us to the point that Star-Trek like data tablet is finally ready for prime time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't we go through this already?
Arm made their push with PDA's  then pushed their demise with the declaration that everyone wanted all their gadgets integrated.
Now they claim everyone wants their gadgets separate and specific?
Guess their original world domination plans didn't work out quite the way they wanted?While I agree that the netbook as it is now will change and evolve, there is now a proven niche for low-mid cost devices that can do basic computer tasks, features and abilities will increase but I don't see this market segment going away.
There are plenty of us that like the idea of a kindle for instance but find it too limited in what it can do, tablets seem like the natural progression.
I know they have been tried before, but integration in the past wasn't nearly at the level it is now and cost of production and ownership kept the really good ones out of the hands of mainstream consumers.
Perhaps improvements in communication, power consumption, quality, speed and costs have advanced us to the point that Star-Trek like data tablet is finally ready for prime time?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30622634</id>
	<title>Bull Hockey!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262450700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This guy has obviously never used a netbook.  My Eee fills a the gap between my iPhone and Desktop computer perfectly.  It does what the iPhone can't and goes where the Desktop can't..  My desktop is the heavy lifter for heavy duty media editing while my iPhone is an ultra portable information device.    I've lugged laptoptops around for over a decade and believe me, smaller is better.</p><p>As for limitations, I don't agree.  No CD/DVD drive.. Optical media is nearing the end of it's life.  Digital downloads and USB flash are quickly killing CD/DVD.  The low power Atom based CPU is perfect.  Long battery life and super green low power.  As for screen size.  I find the LCD backlit 10" screen bright and perfect.</p><p>I suggest this guy got it wrong.  The netbook may kill the laptop segment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This guy has obviously never used a netbook .
My Eee fills a the gap between my iPhone and Desktop computer perfectly .
It does what the iPhone ca n't and goes where the Desktop ca n't.. My desktop is the heavy lifter for heavy duty media editing while my iPhone is an ultra portable information device .
I 've lugged laptoptops around for over a decade and believe me , smaller is better.As for limitations , I do n't agree .
No CD/DVD drive.. Optical media is nearing the end of it 's life .
Digital downloads and USB flash are quickly killing CD/DVD .
The low power Atom based CPU is perfect .
Long battery life and super green low power .
As for screen size .
I find the LCD backlit 10 " screen bright and perfect.I suggest this guy got it wrong .
The netbook may kill the laptop segment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This guy has obviously never used a netbook.
My Eee fills a the gap between my iPhone and Desktop computer perfectly.
It does what the iPhone can't and goes where the Desktop can't..  My desktop is the heavy lifter for heavy duty media editing while my iPhone is an ultra portable information device.
I've lugged laptoptops around for over a decade and believe me, smaller is better.As for limitations, I don't agree.
No CD/DVD drive.. Optical media is nearing the end of it's life.
Digital downloads and USB flash are quickly killing CD/DVD.
The low power Atom based CPU is perfect.
Long battery life and super green low power.
As for screen size.
I find the LCD backlit 10" screen bright and perfect.I suggest this guy got it wrong.
The netbook may kill the laptop segment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616154</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>Angst Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1262340000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In other words, this guy is completely wrong.</p></div><p>Whenever salespeople talk about "what consumers want", it's the same as when politicians talk about "what the American people want": it's what <i>they</i> want. There's more money in cranking out special-purpose devices with high profit margins than there is in cranking out commodity general purpose computers with razor-thin margins. As it happens, this is the exact reverse of what most consumers want, hence the need for marketing flaks to deny it at every opportunity.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In other words , this guy is completely wrong.Whenever salespeople talk about " what consumers want " , it 's the same as when politicians talk about " what the American people want " : it 's what they want .
There 's more money in cranking out special-purpose devices with high profit margins than there is in cranking out commodity general purpose computers with razor-thin margins .
As it happens , this is the exact reverse of what most consumers want , hence the need for marketing flaks to deny it at every opportunity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other words, this guy is completely wrong.Whenever salespeople talk about "what consumers want", it's the same as when politicians talk about "what the American people want": it's what they want.
There's more money in cranking out special-purpose devices with high profit margins than there is in cranking out commodity general purpose computers with razor-thin margins.
As it happens, this is the exact reverse of what most consumers want, hence the need for marketing flaks to deny it at every opportunity.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615724</id>
	<title>Re:predicted convergence unlikely</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262379240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The iSlate is not to be an iPhone with ports for keyboard and monitor.<br>It's to be an tablet computer. and as it's a computer it will have USB ports so you can if you like plug in a keyboard. And most likly also have a mini displayport on it.</p><p>You do not need to drag a keyboard with you.<br>And if you give it a try, then the thought screen keyboard is easy to use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The iSlate is not to be an iPhone with ports for keyboard and monitor.It 's to be an tablet computer .
and as it 's a computer it will have USB ports so you can if you like plug in a keyboard .
And most likly also have a mini displayport on it.You do not need to drag a keyboard with you.And if you give it a try , then the thought screen keyboard is easy to use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iSlate is not to be an iPhone with ports for keyboard and monitor.It's to be an tablet computer.
and as it's a computer it will have USB ports so you can if you like plug in a keyboard.
And most likly also have a mini displayport on it.You do not need to drag a keyboard with you.And if you give it a try, then the thought screen keyboard is easy to use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374</id>
	<title>failure due to high cost, poor quality</title>
	<author>cinnamon colbert</author>
	<datestamp>1262375940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is not clear if the net book is a good idea, but if you go down to bestbuy or microcenter, you find things that are almost as exspensive as a regular laptop, with cruddy features, poorly designed trackpads with the buttons on the side, tiny screens that need scrolling (is that a fubar or what)

and, since they don't run linux, they don't have the 30 second boot time that was one of the most desirable featues - turn it on, check the cloud, turn it off before the first windows splash screen</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is not clear if the net book is a good idea , but if you go down to bestbuy or microcenter , you find things that are almost as exspensive as a regular laptop , with cruddy features , poorly designed trackpads with the buttons on the side , tiny screens that need scrolling ( is that a fubar or what ) and , since they do n't run linux , they do n't have the 30 second boot time that was one of the most desirable featues - turn it on , check the cloud , turn it off before the first windows splash screen</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is not clear if the net book is a good idea, but if you go down to bestbuy or microcenter, you find things that are almost as exspensive as a regular laptop, with cruddy features, poorly designed trackpads with the buttons on the side, tiny screens that need scrolling (is that a fubar or what)

and, since they don't run linux, they don't have the 30 second boot time that was one of the most desirable featues - turn it on, check the cloud, turn it off before the first windows splash screen</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615432</id>
	<title>For selfish reasons, I hope not</title>
	<author>davebarnes</author>
	<datestamp>1262376480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a vested interest in Netbooks being successful: <a href="http://www.netbooksummit.com/" title="netbooksummit.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.netbooksummit.com/</a> [netbooksummit.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a vested interest in Netbooks being successful : http : //www.netbooksummit.com/ [ netbooksummit.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a vested interest in Netbooks being successful: http://www.netbooksummit.com/ [netbooksummit.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615884</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit. It can never die.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262337540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agree, I got an eepc (an older model in the $250 range) with a 160G hard drive.  I boosted the memory to 2G, and installed full Ubuntu plus Skype.  Works great on the road for most purposes.  Dealing with the keyboard and screen is a little cumbersome, but they are bigger than my smartphone keyboard and screen, run a fully capable OS, have decent memory and disk capacity, and are far less cumbersome than a full sized "laptop".  If netbooks are being phased out it is not the consumer, but the industry that is changing the game. It is too bad that they are not being shipped with full Lunux distributions.  Crippled Linux is a non-winner when you can get it and Windows whatever will naturally push the price point.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agree , I got an eepc ( an older model in the $ 250 range ) with a 160G hard drive .
I boosted the memory to 2G , and installed full Ubuntu plus Skype .
Works great on the road for most purposes .
Dealing with the keyboard and screen is a little cumbersome , but they are bigger than my smartphone keyboard and screen , run a fully capable OS , have decent memory and disk capacity , and are far less cumbersome than a full sized " laptop " .
If netbooks are being phased out it is not the consumer , but the industry that is changing the game .
It is too bad that they are not being shipped with full Lunux distributions .
Crippled Linux is a non-winner when you can get it and Windows whatever will naturally push the price point .
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agree, I got an eepc (an older model in the $250 range) with a 160G hard drive.
I boosted the memory to 2G, and installed full Ubuntu plus Skype.
Works great on the road for most purposes.
Dealing with the keyboard and screen is a little cumbersome, but they are bigger than my smartphone keyboard and screen, run a fully capable OS, have decent memory and disk capacity, and are far less cumbersome than a full sized "laptop".
If netbooks are being phased out it is not the consumer, but the industry that is changing the game.
It is too bad that they are not being shipped with full Lunux distributions.
Crippled Linux is a non-winner when you can get it and Windows whatever will naturally push the price point.
   </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617590</id>
	<title>ITS SIMPLE - FLASH</title>
	<author>wintermute000</author>
	<datestamp>1262352540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Consumers see netbook fail because flash is really slow.</p><p>If half of the 'interactive web2.0' wasn't powered by flash we wouldn't have this problem.</p><p>There is no reason a P3 performance chip cannot deliver an OK browsing experience even with AJAX-y rich sites, but throw flash into the mix - unaccelerated - and its foobar.</p><p>And the linux zealots - flash is even worse in linux than windows. Yes I know the reasons (I'm a fedora man).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Consumers see netbook fail because flash is really slow.If half of the 'interactive web2.0 ' was n't powered by flash we would n't have this problem.There is no reason a P3 performance chip can not deliver an OK browsing experience even with AJAX-y rich sites , but throw flash into the mix - unaccelerated - and its foobar.And the linux zealots - flash is even worse in linux than windows .
Yes I know the reasons ( I 'm a fedora man ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Consumers see netbook fail because flash is really slow.If half of the 'interactive web2.0' wasn't powered by flash we wouldn't have this problem.There is no reason a P3 performance chip cannot deliver an OK browsing experience even with AJAX-y rich sites, but throw flash into the mix - unaccelerated - and its foobar.And the linux zealots - flash is even worse in linux than windows.
Yes I know the reasons (I'm a fedora man).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620180</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>mcrbids</author>
	<datestamp>1262375940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Of course he's wrong. </i></p><p>Sure, at least for now.</p><p>But truth is, the long-term trend is that everything is getting "sucked up" into the phone. Let me rattle off some examples that I live with, every day:</p><p>1) I have a dedicated digital camera (I paid $59 for it, BTW) that takes nice, high quality 10 MP pictures, and better-than-VHS quality video, but it's quite common that the shatty camera in my phone is actually good enough for the job, despite its flaws.</p><p>2) I have a dedicated MP3 player, but it's also common that my phone is good enough for that job, too, even if the battery life is weak.</p><p>3) And I have a small-sized laptop that approximates a new "netbook", but it's common that the browser in my phone is good enough, too.</p><p>4) I don't carry maps anymore - google maps is already installed in my phone and is better than any map, anyway, for what I need!</p><p>5) I don't ever remember phone numbers - it's either in my history or contacts list, or doesn't exist. Nicely, my smartphone integrates with my company's Zimbra mail server, so if anything happens to my phone, all my contacts, calendar, and email are backed up on the server!</p><p>6) I have decks of cards, but they are used perhaps 1/10 as often as the card games on my phone. Video games? Sure, but my phone is with me when I'm waiting at the DMV - the Xbox isn't.</p><p>7) I usually watch shows and movies on my Mac Mini in my Bedroom, or on the big-screen in the living room. But often, I watch shows on my phone! Hulu plays passably well on my dual-core ARM based smartphone! Audio isn't great, and the screen is a few inches in size, but it's with me everywhere!</p><p>In short, my phone does none of these especially well, but it does all of these in a manner that's often passable and sometimes best available. The phone is slowly sucking up all these (and more) into a single device, and it gets better every single year. The screens are getting sharper, the battery life improves, the capability gets smoother, the price is dropping... It's improving in every measurable way.</p><p><i>Instead of $99 netbooks, which is the next logical step, we'll end up with &gt;$400 netbooks that will have better graphics, telco tie-ins, 3G instead of wi-fi and other limiting "features". The things that made netbooks so popular will be replaced by things which make more money for the manufacturers and telcos.</i></p><p>Which is just so much silly talk! Manufacturers want to sell hardware, and manufacture stuff that people buy, at a price high enough for them to make money at it. Here you are wailing about netbooks without wifi, <b>when my farking PHONE has wifi</b>. (Incidentally, the wifi in my phone leads to the unusual situation of running skype on my phone over wifi to replace... my phone - head assplodes!)</p><p>Manufacturers will stop selling systems with wifi when people don't want systems with wifi enough to buy them. They will stop selling systems with floppy disks when nobody cares about them. And so on...</p><p>Relax!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course he 's wrong .
Sure , at least for now.But truth is , the long-term trend is that everything is getting " sucked up " into the phone .
Let me rattle off some examples that I live with , every day : 1 ) I have a dedicated digital camera ( I paid $ 59 for it , BTW ) that takes nice , high quality 10 MP pictures , and better-than-VHS quality video , but it 's quite common that the shatty camera in my phone is actually good enough for the job , despite its flaws.2 ) I have a dedicated MP3 player , but it 's also common that my phone is good enough for that job , too , even if the battery life is weak.3 ) And I have a small-sized laptop that approximates a new " netbook " , but it 's common that the browser in my phone is good enough , too.4 ) I do n't carry maps anymore - google maps is already installed in my phone and is better than any map , anyway , for what I need ! 5 ) I do n't ever remember phone numbers - it 's either in my history or contacts list , or does n't exist .
Nicely , my smartphone integrates with my company 's Zimbra mail server , so if anything happens to my phone , all my contacts , calendar , and email are backed up on the server ! 6 ) I have decks of cards , but they are used perhaps 1/10 as often as the card games on my phone .
Video games ?
Sure , but my phone is with me when I 'm waiting at the DMV - the Xbox is n't.7 ) I usually watch shows and movies on my Mac Mini in my Bedroom , or on the big-screen in the living room .
But often , I watch shows on my phone !
Hulu plays passably well on my dual-core ARM based smartphone !
Audio is n't great , and the screen is a few inches in size , but it 's with me everywhere ! In short , my phone does none of these especially well , but it does all of these in a manner that 's often passable and sometimes best available .
The phone is slowly sucking up all these ( and more ) into a single device , and it gets better every single year .
The screens are getting sharper , the battery life improves , the capability gets smoother , the price is dropping... It 's improving in every measurable way.Instead of $ 99 netbooks , which is the next logical step , we 'll end up with &gt; $ 400 netbooks that will have better graphics , telco tie-ins , 3G instead of wi-fi and other limiting " features " .
The things that made netbooks so popular will be replaced by things which make more money for the manufacturers and telcos.Which is just so much silly talk !
Manufacturers want to sell hardware , and manufacture stuff that people buy , at a price high enough for them to make money at it .
Here you are wailing about netbooks without wifi , when my farking PHONE has wifi .
( Incidentally , the wifi in my phone leads to the unusual situation of running skype on my phone over wifi to replace... my phone - head assplodes !
) Manufacturers will stop selling systems with wifi when people do n't want systems with wifi enough to buy them .
They will stop selling systems with floppy disks when nobody cares about them .
And so on...Relax !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course he's wrong.
Sure, at least for now.But truth is, the long-term trend is that everything is getting "sucked up" into the phone.
Let me rattle off some examples that I live with, every day:1) I have a dedicated digital camera (I paid $59 for it, BTW) that takes nice, high quality 10 MP pictures, and better-than-VHS quality video, but it's quite common that the shatty camera in my phone is actually good enough for the job, despite its flaws.2) I have a dedicated MP3 player, but it's also common that my phone is good enough for that job, too, even if the battery life is weak.3) And I have a small-sized laptop that approximates a new "netbook", but it's common that the browser in my phone is good enough, too.4) I don't carry maps anymore - google maps is already installed in my phone and is better than any map, anyway, for what I need!5) I don't ever remember phone numbers - it's either in my history or contacts list, or doesn't exist.
Nicely, my smartphone integrates with my company's Zimbra mail server, so if anything happens to my phone, all my contacts, calendar, and email are backed up on the server!6) I have decks of cards, but they are used perhaps 1/10 as often as the card games on my phone.
Video games?
Sure, but my phone is with me when I'm waiting at the DMV - the Xbox isn't.7) I usually watch shows and movies on my Mac Mini in my Bedroom, or on the big-screen in the living room.
But often, I watch shows on my phone!
Hulu plays passably well on my dual-core ARM based smartphone!
Audio isn't great, and the screen is a few inches in size, but it's with me everywhere!In short, my phone does none of these especially well, but it does all of these in a manner that's often passable and sometimes best available.
The phone is slowly sucking up all these (and more) into a single device, and it gets better every single year.
The screens are getting sharper, the battery life improves, the capability gets smoother, the price is dropping... It's improving in every measurable way.Instead of $99 netbooks, which is the next logical step, we'll end up with &gt;$400 netbooks that will have better graphics, telco tie-ins, 3G instead of wi-fi and other limiting "features".
The things that made netbooks so popular will be replaced by things which make more money for the manufacturers and telcos.Which is just so much silly talk!
Manufacturers want to sell hardware, and manufacture stuff that people buy, at a price high enough for them to make money at it.
Here you are wailing about netbooks without wifi, when my farking PHONE has wifi.
(Incidentally, the wifi in my phone leads to the unusual situation of running skype on my phone over wifi to replace... my phone - head assplodes!
)Manufacturers will stop selling systems with wifi when people don't want systems with wifi enough to buy them.
They will stop selling systems with floppy disks when nobody cares about them.
And so on...Relax!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618776</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>Billly Gates</author>
	<datestamp>1262359740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a flaw to that line of thinking.</p><p>A competitor will come in and make it cheaper and companies like Walmart will use its leveredge to make it happen. If patents get in the way then companyA will outsource to India or China where these silly IP laws wont hurt them and they can cut on labor costs. This is what the new economy is about. About going cheap and betting on volume in cheap countries.</p><p>If Intel wont make cheap Atom processors then AMD or someone else will make ARM processors and make revunue based on volume instead of price.</p><p>This is the new norm and patents only have a limited life span.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a flaw to that line of thinking.A competitor will come in and make it cheaper and companies like Walmart will use its leveredge to make it happen .
If patents get in the way then companyA will outsource to India or China where these silly IP laws wont hurt them and they can cut on labor costs .
This is what the new economy is about .
About going cheap and betting on volume in cheap countries.If Intel wont make cheap Atom processors then AMD or someone else will make ARM processors and make revunue based on volume instead of price.This is the new norm and patents only have a limited life span .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a flaw to that line of thinking.A competitor will come in and make it cheaper and companies like Walmart will use its leveredge to make it happen.
If patents get in the way then companyA will outsource to India or China where these silly IP laws wont hurt them and they can cut on labor costs.
This is what the new economy is about.
About going cheap and betting on volume in cheap countries.If Intel wont make cheap Atom processors then AMD or someone else will make ARM processors and make revunue based on volume instead of price.This is the new norm and patents only have a limited life span.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616222</id>
	<title>The device I want</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262340840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anybody who passes the age of 40, their eyesight starts failing, they need reading glasses, etc.  Even with reading glasses, it can be a drag to read small screens.</p><p>I want a portable device where the display and peripherals are separate from the device.</p><p>Make the DEVICE as powerful as possible and small enough to fit in my pocket.</p><p>Make the DISPLAY cheap, huge screens hung anywhere - your TV, at work on your desk, embedded in the table at the Internet cafe<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  Let the device wirelessly work the display and any peripherals.</p><p>This will not only help those of us with gradually failing eyesight, it will be convenient as hell.</p><p>THAT will be the killer hardware application to beat all others.  Netbooks are silly, because while the form factor for the device can shrink and needed to shrink, there was no reason to shrink the form factor for the display.</p><p>Imagine sitting down at the wireless hotspot, pulling out your device the size of a pocket telephone, and then viewing your display on the large screen that was waiting there, provided for you to come along and interact with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anybody who passes the age of 40 , their eyesight starts failing , they need reading glasses , etc .
Even with reading glasses , it can be a drag to read small screens.I want a portable device where the display and peripherals are separate from the device.Make the DEVICE as powerful as possible and small enough to fit in my pocket.Make the DISPLAY cheap , huge screens hung anywhere - your TV , at work on your desk , embedded in the table at the Internet cafe ... Let the device wirelessly work the display and any peripherals.This will not only help those of us with gradually failing eyesight , it will be convenient as hell.THAT will be the killer hardware application to beat all others .
Netbooks are silly , because while the form factor for the device can shrink and needed to shrink , there was no reason to shrink the form factor for the display.Imagine sitting down at the wireless hotspot , pulling out your device the size of a pocket telephone , and then viewing your display on the large screen that was waiting there , provided for you to come along and interact with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anybody who passes the age of 40, their eyesight starts failing, they need reading glasses, etc.
Even with reading glasses, it can be a drag to read small screens.I want a portable device where the display and peripherals are separate from the device.Make the DEVICE as powerful as possible and small enough to fit in my pocket.Make the DISPLAY cheap, huge screens hung anywhere - your TV, at work on your desk, embedded in the table at the Internet cafe ...  Let the device wirelessly work the display and any peripherals.This will not only help those of us with gradually failing eyesight, it will be convenient as hell.THAT will be the killer hardware application to beat all others.
Netbooks are silly, because while the form factor for the device can shrink and needed to shrink, there was no reason to shrink the form factor for the display.Imagine sitting down at the wireless hotspot, pulling out your device the size of a pocket telephone, and then viewing your display on the large screen that was waiting there, provided for you to come along and interact with it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615700</id>
	<title>Wow, really getting sick...</title>
	<author>Pederson</author>
	<datestamp>1262378940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, really getting sick of this 'netbooks are underpowered' crap that the market/media seems to be pushing on us. We get it, you like the illusion that they can't do anything but email/browse so we'll buy your more expensive machines. I have a Lenovo s10-2 with an extra 1GB ram (2GB total), which when all was said and done cost be about $400 USD. There's nothing I cannot do unless directly hindered by my limited resolution (which I easily solve by plugging into my monitor (which I also did/do with my other notebooks ranging from 13"-17")).  I have Photoshop (which sure, takes an extra 30sec-1min to start up than my dual core, who cares?), I have the same amount 'constant running' apps I've always had, there's only two web based apps that didn't exactly run as smooth as did before (Google Wave, Aviary, both early in development) and hell I can even smoothly run World Of Warcraft (with settings obviously brought down, but that's a given), in major cities running with 20++ FPS easily. This 'underpowered' bullshit is just that, an attempt at getting the uneducated consumer to move up a step in price. Anyone actually knowledgable/experienced in the market doesn't need a constant reminder that they're 'underpowered' as they know the tag is simply for the stupid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , really getting sick of this 'netbooks are underpowered ' crap that the market/media seems to be pushing on us .
We get it , you like the illusion that they ca n't do anything but email/browse so we 'll buy your more expensive machines .
I have a Lenovo s10-2 with an extra 1GB ram ( 2GB total ) , which when all was said and done cost be about $ 400 USD .
There 's nothing I can not do unless directly hindered by my limited resolution ( which I easily solve by plugging into my monitor ( which I also did/do with my other notebooks ranging from 13 " -17 " ) ) .
I have Photoshop ( which sure , takes an extra 30sec-1min to start up than my dual core , who cares ?
) , I have the same amount 'constant running ' apps I 've always had , there 's only two web based apps that did n't exactly run as smooth as did before ( Google Wave , Aviary , both early in development ) and hell I can even smoothly run World Of Warcraft ( with settings obviously brought down , but that 's a given ) , in major cities running with 20 + + FPS easily .
This 'underpowered ' bullshit is just that , an attempt at getting the uneducated consumer to move up a step in price .
Anyone actually knowledgable/experienced in the market does n't need a constant reminder that they 're 'underpowered ' as they know the tag is simply for the stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, really getting sick of this 'netbooks are underpowered' crap that the market/media seems to be pushing on us.
We get it, you like the illusion that they can't do anything but email/browse so we'll buy your more expensive machines.
I have a Lenovo s10-2 with an extra 1GB ram (2GB total), which when all was said and done cost be about $400 USD.
There's nothing I cannot do unless directly hindered by my limited resolution (which I easily solve by plugging into my monitor (which I also did/do with my other notebooks ranging from 13"-17")).
I have Photoshop (which sure, takes an extra 30sec-1min to start up than my dual core, who cares?
), I have the same amount 'constant running' apps I've always had, there's only two web based apps that didn't exactly run as smooth as did before (Google Wave, Aviary, both early in development) and hell I can even smoothly run World Of Warcraft (with settings obviously brought down, but that's a given), in major cities running with 20++ FPS easily.
This 'underpowered' bullshit is just that, an attempt at getting the uneducated consumer to move up a step in price.
Anyone actually knowledgable/experienced in the market doesn't need a constant reminder that they're 'underpowered' as they know the tag is simply for the stupid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615836</id>
	<title>A subnotebook by any other name...</title>
	<author>starbugs</author>
	<datestamp>1262337060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My new netbook is the same size and relative speed as my 5 year old Toughbook (CF-M34), just less drop-able.<br>And I think my 1995 IBM 701 thinkpad was even smaller.</p><p>The format stays the same, we're not going to carry-around another device just for Facebook. Even non-smart-phones can change your status, and I doubt Facebook will change that.</p><p>The netbook just made an old product new again.</p><p>It's a new sub-notebook at the same price as a 5-10 year old "Used" small laptop(sub-notebook) that you can find on E-Bay. And it runs at about the same speed. The netbook just tapped a market that was previously limited to used computers and the netbook I'm using right now is $100 dollars cheaper than when I first bought it 6 months ago.</p><p>You can now spend $300 every 18 months and replace your netbook as often as your cellphone.</p><p>As to specialized gadgets.</p><p>When I leave home, I've got my:<br>Smartphone, (Always)<br>Music player, (Only if I know I will use it, and I want to conserve cellphone battery life)<br>Netbook, (Only if I will do some serious work(or net-surfing))<br>8-track player (Only if I know I will meet someone from the BBC so that they can write an article about how the world is going to re-embrace analog music, cause it just sounds so much better than that MP3 mumbojumbo)</p><p>oh, and a Coffee-cup (Always)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My new netbook is the same size and relative speed as my 5 year old Toughbook ( CF-M34 ) , just less drop-able.And I think my 1995 IBM 701 thinkpad was even smaller.The format stays the same , we 're not going to carry-around another device just for Facebook .
Even non-smart-phones can change your status , and I doubt Facebook will change that.The netbook just made an old product new again.It 's a new sub-notebook at the same price as a 5-10 year old " Used " small laptop ( sub-notebook ) that you can find on E-Bay .
And it runs at about the same speed .
The netbook just tapped a market that was previously limited to used computers and the netbook I 'm using right now is $ 100 dollars cheaper than when I first bought it 6 months ago.You can now spend $ 300 every 18 months and replace your netbook as often as your cellphone.As to specialized gadgets.When I leave home , I 've got my : Smartphone , ( Always ) Music player , ( Only if I know I will use it , and I want to conserve cellphone battery life ) Netbook , ( Only if I will do some serious work ( or net-surfing ) ) 8-track player ( Only if I know I will meet someone from the BBC so that they can write an article about how the world is going to re-embrace analog music , cause it just sounds so much better than that MP3 mumbojumbo ) oh , and a Coffee-cup ( Always )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My new netbook is the same size and relative speed as my 5 year old Toughbook (CF-M34), just less drop-able.And I think my 1995 IBM 701 thinkpad was even smaller.The format stays the same, we're not going to carry-around another device just for Facebook.
Even non-smart-phones can change your status, and I doubt Facebook will change that.The netbook just made an old product new again.It's a new sub-notebook at the same price as a 5-10 year old "Used" small laptop(sub-notebook) that you can find on E-Bay.
And it runs at about the same speed.
The netbook just tapped a market that was previously limited to used computers and the netbook I'm using right now is $100 dollars cheaper than when I first bought it 6 months ago.You can now spend $300 every 18 months and replace your netbook as often as your cellphone.As to specialized gadgets.When I leave home, I've got my:Smartphone, (Always)Music player, (Only if I know I will use it, and I want to conserve cellphone battery life)Netbook, (Only if I will do some serious work(or net-surfing))8-track player (Only if I know I will meet someone from the BBC so that they can write an article about how the world is going to re-embrace analog music, cause it just sounds so much better than that MP3 mumbojumbo)oh, and a Coffee-cup (Always)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616904</id>
	<title>Netbooks are extremely useful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262347320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've owned or used extensively several larger laptops (~15 inch), a desktop, an Acer Aspire One  and an EEEPC 1000H 10" (1024x600) running XP. The EEEPC is what I use the most often by far. It has a long battery, I can shove it in my half-size backpack in two seconds, I don't need to carry around a cord if I'm gone for just the day, I can do word processing, browse the web, play some games on it to pass the time, and watch movies from the HD. The keyboard is large enough to easily type on (with the Aspire One it's possible but uncomfortable). Basically, it is perfect. Sure, I wouldn't mind some slight improvements in power, but 10" is the perfect size in the tradeoff between portability and usability. I would buy the EEEPC over a full-size laptop three times as fast if they were the same price, because it is far more useful to me. Doesn't seem really hard to understand, really.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've owned or used extensively several larger laptops ( ~ 15 inch ) , a desktop , an Acer Aspire One and an EEEPC 1000H 10 " ( 1024x600 ) running XP .
The EEEPC is what I use the most often by far .
It has a long battery , I can shove it in my half-size backpack in two seconds , I do n't need to carry around a cord if I 'm gone for just the day , I can do word processing , browse the web , play some games on it to pass the time , and watch movies from the HD .
The keyboard is large enough to easily type on ( with the Aspire One it 's possible but uncomfortable ) .
Basically , it is perfect .
Sure , I would n't mind some slight improvements in power , but 10 " is the perfect size in the tradeoff between portability and usability .
I would buy the EEEPC over a full-size laptop three times as fast if they were the same price , because it is far more useful to me .
Does n't seem really hard to understand , really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've owned or used extensively several larger laptops (~15 inch), a desktop, an Acer Aspire One  and an EEEPC 1000H 10" (1024x600) running XP.
The EEEPC is what I use the most often by far.
It has a long battery, I can shove it in my half-size backpack in two seconds, I don't need to carry around a cord if I'm gone for just the day, I can do word processing, browse the web, play some games on it to pass the time, and watch movies from the HD.
The keyboard is large enough to easily type on (with the Aspire One it's possible but uncomfortable).
Basically, it is perfect.
Sure, I wouldn't mind some slight improvements in power, but 10" is the perfect size in the tradeoff between portability and usability.
I would buy the EEEPC over a full-size laptop three times as fast if they were the same price, because it is far more useful to me.
Doesn't seem really hard to understand, really.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615818</id>
	<title>Re:Trust ARM</title>
	<author>Nadaka</author>
	<datestamp>1262336820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the vast majority of arm processors are fabbed with all components, including RAM on one chip. They won't need a 64bit processor until people start putting close to 4 gigs of ram on chip (most are in the 64meg to 512 meg range). Supposedly qualcom is releasing a dual core 1.5 ghz arm chip with a gig of ram sometime this year, we will see where it goes from there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the vast majority of arm processors are fabbed with all components , including RAM on one chip .
They wo n't need a 64bit processor until people start putting close to 4 gigs of ram on chip ( most are in the 64meg to 512 meg range ) .
Supposedly qualcom is releasing a dual core 1.5 ghz arm chip with a gig of ram sometime this year , we will see where it goes from there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the vast majority of arm processors are fabbed with all components, including RAM on one chip.
They won't need a 64bit processor until people start putting close to 4 gigs of ram on chip (most are in the 64meg to 512 meg range).
Supposedly qualcom is releasing a dual core 1.5 ghz arm chip with a gig of ram sometime this year, we will see where it goes from there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336</id>
	<title>Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>AnotherUsername</author>
	<datestamp>1262375520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder whether or not the same thing will happen to phones.  As people use their phone for more and more, will the cost rise so much that it will be prohibitively expensive?  Does this mean that, at least for the near future, the idea of a phone as a true personal computer is just a device from science fiction stories(just like flying cars)?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder whether or not the same thing will happen to phones .
As people use their phone for more and more , will the cost rise so much that it will be prohibitively expensive ?
Does this mean that , at least for the near future , the idea of a phone as a true personal computer is just a device from science fiction stories ( just like flying cars ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder whether or not the same thing will happen to phones.
As people use their phone for more and more, will the cost rise so much that it will be prohibitively expensive?
Does this mean that, at least for the near future, the idea of a phone as a true personal computer is just a device from science fiction stories(just like flying cars)?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618766</id>
	<title>Small, low cost laptop</title>
	<author>vga\_init</author>
	<datestamp>1262359740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think small, low cost laptops will always be in demand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think small , low cost laptops will always be in demand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think small, low cost laptops will always be in demand.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616148</id>
	<title>Don't run linux?  Huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262339940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My netbook is running Ubuntu (full desktop version not their netbook remix).  So what do you mean they don't run linux?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My netbook is running Ubuntu ( full desktop version not their netbook remix ) .
So what do you mean they do n't run linux ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My netbook is running Ubuntu (full desktop version not their netbook remix).
So what do you mean they don't run linux?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619156</id>
	<title>cost &amp; capability</title>
	<author>lavardo</author>
	<datestamp>1262363520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I haven't read too many of the above comments, but I believe these comments are totally incorrect.  As far as the phone goes, capabilities continue to rise.  And the costs of those phones are getting cheaper.  And the netbook popularty is rising, because their capabilities have risen so much and the prices have decreased.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't read too many of the above comments , but I believe these comments are totally incorrect .
As far as the phone goes , capabilities continue to rise .
And the costs of those phones are getting cheaper .
And the netbook popularty is rising , because their capabilities have risen so much and the prices have decreased .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't read too many of the above comments, but I believe these comments are totally incorrect.
As far as the phone goes, capabilities continue to rise.
And the costs of those phones are getting cheaper.
And the netbook popularty is rising, because their capabilities have risen so much and the prices have decreased.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617324</id>
	<title>netbooks are fine</title>
	<author>luther349</author>
	<datestamp>1262350560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>its just those fake ms restrictions they put on. the atom dule core and nivida one gpu have really have given netbooks more power even in gaming. as long as most netbook makers ignore ms and install windows anyways or use linux until ms relises they can not say how they should be built.after that happons netbooks will just keep getting more powerfull and cheaper.</htmltext>
<tokenext>its just those fake ms restrictions they put on .
the atom dule core and nivida one gpu have really have given netbooks more power even in gaming .
as long as most netbook makers ignore ms and install windows anyways or use linux until ms relises they can not say how they should be built.after that happons netbooks will just keep getting more powerfull and cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its just those fake ms restrictions they put on.
the atom dule core and nivida one gpu have really have given netbooks more power even in gaming.
as long as most netbook makers ignore ms and install windows anyways or use linux until ms relises they can not say how they should be built.after that happons netbooks will just keep getting more powerfull and cheaper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616284</id>
	<title>Re:Wintel</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1262341620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft and Intel have been very uninterested in netbooks since they don't have the same market share as full size laptops.</p></div><p>Right, which is why 7 was specifically optimized and tested to work better on netbooks.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the version of Windows 7 that gets stuck on a netbook is so limited you can't even change the background.</p></div><p>You don't have to go with that version. You can always have a netbook with Home or even Ultimate.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft and Intel have been very uninterested in netbooks since they do n't have the same market share as full size laptops.Right , which is why 7 was specifically optimized and tested to work better on netbooks.the version of Windows 7 that gets stuck on a netbook is so limited you ca n't even change the background.You do n't have to go with that version .
You can always have a netbook with Home or even Ultimate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft and Intel have been very uninterested in netbooks since they don't have the same market share as full size laptops.Right, which is why 7 was specifically optimized and tested to work better on netbooks.the version of Windows 7 that gets stuck on a netbook is so limited you can't even change the background.You don't have to go with that version.
You can always have a netbook with Home or even Ultimate.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615920</id>
	<title>Re:failure due to high cost, poor quality</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1262337840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course with the netbook craze, every laptop manufacturer wanted to release an "eee killer".</p><p>That usually meant stuffing more expensive hardware in bigger form factor and charging more money for it. So they were in fact trying to make a netbook that is more like a laptop and less like a netbook. To me, that seems like fundamental lack of understanding of netbook market.</p><p>They could have made a true eee killer. Giving it the same specs as eee and reducing price by 20\%.<br>The power of netbooks is:<br>- full PC. No ARM, no Android, no weird stuff. It's a PC and runs PC software.<br>- touch-typing keyboard. So you can type with all fingers, not just thumbs.<br>- very portable<br>- CHEAP.</p><p>The rest is hardly important although screen that doesn't waste space granted by the form factor is a plus. So is battery life. But GPRS, multi-core CPU, fast gfx cards, DVD-ROMs, all that junk deducts from the value of the product instead of adding to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course with the netbook craze , every laptop manufacturer wanted to release an " eee killer " .That usually meant stuffing more expensive hardware in bigger form factor and charging more money for it .
So they were in fact trying to make a netbook that is more like a laptop and less like a netbook .
To me , that seems like fundamental lack of understanding of netbook market.They could have made a true eee killer .
Giving it the same specs as eee and reducing price by 20 \ % .The power of netbooks is : - full PC .
No ARM , no Android , no weird stuff .
It 's a PC and runs PC software.- touch-typing keyboard .
So you can type with all fingers , not just thumbs.- very portable- CHEAP.The rest is hardly important although screen that does n't waste space granted by the form factor is a plus .
So is battery life .
But GPRS , multi-core CPU , fast gfx cards , DVD-ROMs , all that junk deducts from the value of the product instead of adding to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course with the netbook craze, every laptop manufacturer wanted to release an "eee killer".That usually meant stuffing more expensive hardware in bigger form factor and charging more money for it.
So they were in fact trying to make a netbook that is more like a laptop and less like a netbook.
To me, that seems like fundamental lack of understanding of netbook market.They could have made a true eee killer.
Giving it the same specs as eee and reducing price by 20\%.The power of netbooks is:- full PC.
No ARM, no Android, no weird stuff.
It's a PC and runs PC software.- touch-typing keyboard.
So you can type with all fingers, not just thumbs.- very portable- CHEAP.The rest is hardly important although screen that doesn't waste space granted by the form factor is a plus.
So is battery life.
But GPRS, multi-core CPU, fast gfx cards, DVD-ROMs, all that junk deducts from the value of the product instead of adding to it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615588</id>
	<title>Best of all worlds</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1262377860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cheap, small, foldable screen or keyboard (so you can use it as touchscreen or laptop), good (not great, just enough) resolution and speed, Thats the point to which a lot of things seems to be converging, from the cellphone arena (i.e. the Nokia N900, Palm Pre or some Android based phones ) or the note/net books arena (like the Asus T91, Fujitsu Lifebook and a lot of others) and probably more around (iSlate?). 3G connection, gps, even tv receiver are usual extras.<br><br>So netbooks have a future, at least if can be used as tablets too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cheap , small , foldable screen or keyboard ( so you can use it as touchscreen or laptop ) , good ( not great , just enough ) resolution and speed , Thats the point to which a lot of things seems to be converging , from the cellphone arena ( i.e .
the Nokia N900 , Palm Pre or some Android based phones ) or the note/net books arena ( like the Asus T91 , Fujitsu Lifebook and a lot of others ) and probably more around ( iSlate ? ) .
3G connection , gps , even tv receiver are usual extras.So netbooks have a future , at least if can be used as tablets too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cheap, small, foldable screen or keyboard (so you can use it as touchscreen or laptop), good (not great, just enough) resolution and speed, Thats the point to which a lot of things seems to be converging, from the cellphone arena (i.e.
the Nokia N900, Palm Pre or some Android based phones ) or the note/net books arena (like the Asus T91, Fujitsu Lifebook and a lot of others) and probably more around (iSlate?).
3G connection, gps, even tv receiver are usual extras.So netbooks have a future, at least if can be used as tablets too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615752</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>olsmeister</author>
	<datestamp>1262379480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree.  I bought a Droid recently, and without trying to give it a shameless plug (I'm sure iphone is similar) I was amazed at how well it served my purposes when away from my computer.  I don't feel any need at all for a netbook now.  And, it fits in my pocket and makes phone calls...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
I bought a Droid recently , and without trying to give it a shameless plug ( I 'm sure iphone is similar ) I was amazed at how well it served my purposes when away from my computer .
I do n't feel any need at all for a netbook now .
And , it fits in my pocket and makes phone calls.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
I bought a Droid recently, and without trying to give it a shameless plug (I'm sure iphone is similar) I was amazed at how well it served my purposes when away from my computer.
I don't feel any need at all for a netbook now.
And, it fits in my pocket and makes phone calls...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616498</id>
	<title>A different sort of "netbook"</title>
	<author>itsdapead</author>
	<datestamp>1262343660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Apple's rumored iSlate, an <b>iPhone</b></p> </div><p>I think that's the point: iSlates and competing tablets can be marketed as a better way of running iPhone/Android-style "Apps(tm)" rather than as a way of running desktop PC applicatons - which is what the netbook has become.

</p><p>Had the original eeePC 700 been a better product (better battery life, better Linux distro, better tailoring of the UI and applications to work on a tiny screen) then maybe the original concept would have take off. As it was, it kickstarted the market for small, cheap (mainly) Windows laptops that could do everything a desktop PC could, and the original concept was effectivey abandoned.

</p><p>The new "tablets" have the advantage that they will be building on established, <i>non-PC</i> platforms with established software bases (its not all fart apps) and developer communities, running OSs and applcations designed from the ground up for use on small, touchscreen devices and making full use of new tricks such as multitouch and accelerometers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple 's rumored iSlate , an iPhone I think that 's the point : iSlates and competing tablets can be marketed as a better way of running iPhone/Android-style " Apps ( tm ) " rather than as a way of running desktop PC applicatons - which is what the netbook has become .
Had the original eeePC 700 been a better product ( better battery life , better Linux distro , better tailoring of the UI and applications to work on a tiny screen ) then maybe the original concept would have take off .
As it was , it kickstarted the market for small , cheap ( mainly ) Windows laptops that could do everything a desktop PC could , and the original concept was effectivey abandoned .
The new " tablets " have the advantage that they will be building on established , non-PC platforms with established software bases ( its not all fart apps ) and developer communities , running OSs and applcations designed from the ground up for use on small , touchscreen devices and making full use of new tricks such as multitouch and accelerometers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple's rumored iSlate, an iPhone I think that's the point: iSlates and competing tablets can be marketed as a better way of running iPhone/Android-style "Apps(tm)" rather than as a way of running desktop PC applicatons - which is what the netbook has become.
Had the original eeePC 700 been a better product (better battery life, better Linux distro, better tailoring of the UI and applications to work on a tiny screen) then maybe the original concept would have take off.
As it was, it kickstarted the market for small, cheap (mainly) Windows laptops that could do everything a desktop PC could, and the original concept was effectivey abandoned.
The new "tablets" have the advantage that they will be building on established, non-PC platforms with established software bases (its not all fart apps) and developer communities, running OSs and applcations designed from the ground up for use on small, touchscreen devices and making full use of new tricks such as multitouch and accelerometers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615910</id>
	<title>Fp tRoll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262337780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>states that there 6is mired in an</htmltext>
<tokenext>states that there 6is mired in an</tokentext>
<sentencetext>states that there 6is mired in an</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620230</id>
	<title>More crap - what people really want is -</title>
	<author>dogzdik</author>
	<datestamp>1262463240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think everyone would benefit from a PC the size of a grain of rice - with an atomic 100 year battery and a holographic screen and keyboard.

What people want in a net book, is a netbook with the guts of a supercomputer and to have it weigh under 100 grams.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think everyone would benefit from a PC the size of a grain of rice - with an atomic 100 year battery and a holographic screen and keyboard .
What people want in a net book , is a netbook with the guts of a supercomputer and to have it weigh under 100 grams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think everyone would benefit from a PC the size of a grain of rice - with an atomic 100 year battery and a holographic screen and keyboard.
What people want in a net book, is a netbook with the guts of a supercomputer and to have it weigh under 100 grams.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619314</id>
	<title>Re:I want a small light notebook</title>
	<author>wiredlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1262365260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Fujitsu P16(10,20,30) has what you're looking for. You get a convertible touchscreen thrown in as a bonus. With the extended battery, undervolting, and underclocking they can be made to run for six hours under light use. The P1610 can be had for less than the cost of a new netbook on eBay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Fujitsu P16 ( 10,20,30 ) has what you 're looking for .
You get a convertible touchscreen thrown in as a bonus .
With the extended battery , undervolting , and underclocking they can be made to run for six hours under light use .
The P1610 can be had for less than the cost of a new netbook on eBay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Fujitsu P16(10,20,30) has what you're looking for.
You get a convertible touchscreen thrown in as a bonus.
With the extended battery, undervolting, and underclocking they can be made to run for six hours under light use.
The P1610 can be had for less than the cost of a new netbook on eBay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620056</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1262374200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm not sure which is more annoying - people saying "Micro$oft" or people saying "MSFT".Talk like humans, would you?</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure which is more annoying - people saying " Micro $ oft " or people saying " MSFT " .Talk like humans , would you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure which is more annoying - people saying "Micro$oft" or people saying "MSFT".Talk like humans, would you?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616230</id>
	<title>Awesome</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1262340960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess that will mean 2010 will be the perfect time to get one cheap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess that will mean 2010 will be the perfect time to get one cheap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess that will mean 2010 will be the perfect time to get one cheap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615882</id>
	<title>flash bloat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262337540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a netbook owner, the best thing about the device is its quick boot up, portability, and power. I can play divx, xvid, maybe even some mkv off my USB using VLC player, but the biggest drawback I keep having is its inability to play Hulu, YouTube, or TuDou smoothly because flash 10 is such bloatware that makes the framerate lag at 12-14 fps. Any other sites with embedded flash video prior to ver. 10 runs just fine, regardless of video quality/ size. Adobe is ruining netbooks for everyone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a netbook owner , the best thing about the device is its quick boot up , portability , and power .
I can play divx , xvid , maybe even some mkv off my USB using VLC player , but the biggest drawback I keep having is its inability to play Hulu , YouTube , or TuDou smoothly because flash 10 is such bloatware that makes the framerate lag at 12-14 fps .
Any other sites with embedded flash video prior to ver .
10 runs just fine , regardless of video quality/ size .
Adobe is ruining netbooks for everyone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a netbook owner, the best thing about the device is its quick boot up, portability, and power.
I can play divx, xvid, maybe even some mkv off my USB using VLC player, but the biggest drawback I keep having is its inability to play Hulu, YouTube, or TuDou smoothly because flash 10 is such bloatware that makes the framerate lag at 12-14 fps.
Any other sites with embedded flash video prior to ver.
10 runs just fine, regardless of video quality/ size.
Adobe is ruining netbooks for everyone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430</id>
	<title>predicted convergence unlikely</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Impetus for this change will come, he believes, from the phone world</p></div><p>The predicted convergence is very unlikely for two reasons: keyboard and display.  It is not possible to be as productive on a less-than 25cm wide cell phone keyboard as on a netbook, and nobody has holsters or shirt pockets large enough for a real keyboard. The same holds true for displays.  Phones are fine for reading WAP-enabled HTML and composing short emails or text messages, but that's not what people use netbooks for.</p><p>Apple's rumored iSlate, an iPhone with ports for keyboard and monitor, may work for some but the hassle of carrying around a keyboard/monitor won't be easier than carrying around a netbook, and netbooks will always have far more CPU and RAM.</p><p>I have to agree with my engineering friends on the other side of the pond and chalk up another faux-pas to the BBC, whose website, streaming audio, and tech reporting have never been particularly cutting edge.  Not that our own NPR/PRI does tech any better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Impetus for this change will come , he believes , from the phone worldThe predicted convergence is very unlikely for two reasons : keyboard and display .
It is not possible to be as productive on a less-than 25cm wide cell phone keyboard as on a netbook , and nobody has holsters or shirt pockets large enough for a real keyboard .
The same holds true for displays .
Phones are fine for reading WAP-enabled HTML and composing short emails or text messages , but that 's not what people use netbooks for.Apple 's rumored iSlate , an iPhone with ports for keyboard and monitor , may work for some but the hassle of carrying around a keyboard/monitor wo n't be easier than carrying around a netbook , and netbooks will always have far more CPU and RAM.I have to agree with my engineering friends on the other side of the pond and chalk up another faux-pas to the BBC , whose website , streaming audio , and tech reporting have never been particularly cutting edge .
Not that our own NPR/PRI does tech any better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Impetus for this change will come, he believes, from the phone worldThe predicted convergence is very unlikely for two reasons: keyboard and display.
It is not possible to be as productive on a less-than 25cm wide cell phone keyboard as on a netbook, and nobody has holsters or shirt pockets large enough for a real keyboard.
The same holds true for displays.
Phones are fine for reading WAP-enabled HTML and composing short emails or text messages, but that's not what people use netbooks for.Apple's rumored iSlate, an iPhone with ports for keyboard and monitor, may work for some but the hassle of carrying around a keyboard/monitor won't be easier than carrying around a netbook, and netbooks will always have far more CPU and RAM.I have to agree with my engineering friends on the other side of the pond and chalk up another faux-pas to the BBC, whose website, streaming audio, and tech reporting have never been particularly cutting edge.
Not that our own NPR/PRI does tech any better.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620744</id>
	<title>Don't trust slashdot posts for accuracy</title>
	<author>BBF\_BBF</author>
	<datestamp>1262427060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Some people will still say that they can do all their basic stuff on a netbook, but when you can fork out an extra $100 and get something like a Dell 11z or 13z (Core 2 Duo 1.3GHz, 9 hour battery life), I really don't see the point.</p></div><p>1. Dell doesn't make a 13z, it makes the 11z and 14z.
2. Only the 14z comes with a core 2 duo processor, the 11z only comes with single core processors
3. The 14z with dual core processor, 9 hour battery and crappy intel integrated graphics costs $789...  Only $100 more than a normal netbook?  In what dreamland?
The 11z costs around $414 with a celeron processor and 6 hour battery, which is $100 ish more than a 'normal' pine trail netbook but its specs aren't much better than a normal netbook other than the processor.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some people will still say that they can do all their basic stuff on a netbook , but when you can fork out an extra $ 100 and get something like a Dell 11z or 13z ( Core 2 Duo 1.3GHz , 9 hour battery life ) , I really do n't see the point.1 .
Dell does n't make a 13z , it makes the 11z and 14z .
2. Only the 14z comes with a core 2 duo processor , the 11z only comes with single core processors 3 .
The 14z with dual core processor , 9 hour battery and crappy intel integrated graphics costs $ 789... Only $ 100 more than a normal netbook ?
In what dreamland ?
The 11z costs around $ 414 with a celeron processor and 6 hour battery , which is $ 100 ish more than a 'normal ' pine trail netbook but its specs are n't much better than a normal netbook other than the processor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some people will still say that they can do all their basic stuff on a netbook, but when you can fork out an extra $100 and get something like a Dell 11z or 13z (Core 2 Duo 1.3GHz, 9 hour battery life), I really don't see the point.1.
Dell doesn't make a 13z, it makes the 11z and 14z.
2. Only the 14z comes with a core 2 duo processor, the 11z only comes with single core processors
3.
The 14z with dual core processor, 9 hour battery and crappy intel integrated graphics costs $789...  Only $100 more than a normal netbook?
In what dreamland?
The 11z costs around $414 with a celeron processor and 6 hour battery, which is $100 ish more than a 'normal' pine trail netbook but its specs aren't much better than a normal netbook other than the processor.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615456</id>
	<title>Netbooks fail in one point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>battery life!</p><p>Netbooks are the portable typewriter of the 21th century</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>battery life ! Netbooks are the portable typewriter of the 21th century</tokentext>
<sentencetext>battery life!Netbooks are the portable typewriter of the 21th century</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615614</id>
	<title>Netbook was never really a separate category</title>
	<author>pyite69</author>
	<datestamp>1262378160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They were just a smaller laptop.  Certainly, blurring the lines is going to happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They were just a smaller laptop .
Certainly , blurring the lines is going to happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were just a smaller laptop.
Certainly, blurring the lines is going to happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616706</id>
	<title>Moo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262345520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>posting to undo accidental moderation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>posting to undo accidental moderation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>posting to undo accidental moderation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615592</id>
	<title>What's important about a netbook</title>
	<author>johnkzin</author>
	<datestamp>1262377860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To me, what's important about a netbook, is:</p><p>1) size -- 7" - 12" screen</p><p>2) price -- under $600</p><p>3) functionality -- runs the basics (real web browser, terminal or dedicated ssh client, vnc viewer, IM, document viewers)</p><p>4) shape -- the above things can also be applied to "tablets", but the difference between a mid-range tablet and a mid-range "clamshell" is the keyboard.  The "mid-range clamshell" is a "netbook" (with or without the swivel screen/convertible tablet capability).  Not a smartbook, not a sub-notebook, etc.  Those are just market-droid's attempts to re-brand and differentiate from past models of the same thing.  It's a netbook.</p><p>I personally don't think #1 will ever go away, whether you call it a "netbook", "smartbook", or "sub-notebook".</p><p>I don't think the price is going to really have a huge change either.  Sure, some netbooks are getting more expensive.  But, some "laptops" are also coming down to a price point that competes with netbooks.</p><p>As for functionality, as time marches forward, the capabilities of devices in that size and price rang will increase.  That's a given.  So, eventually, netbooks will run more than just the basics.  But the point is: they need to always run those basics well.</p><p>So, while the marketing blurbs may change, and the exact numbers might change, I'm willing to bet that the actual device category (7-12 inch screen, well under $100, runs basic apps) is here to stay.  The only thing I think that might change<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... is that someone might come up with a truly compelling device that matches 1-3, but doesn't keep the keyboard.  Maybe it'll be the EnTourage eDGe (dual screen tablet, like the OLPC2 concept, or the Microsoft Courier).  Maybe it'll be a plain tablet (Notion Ink Adam, or the highly anticipated Apple tablet).  Maybe it's something we haven't envisioned yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To me , what 's important about a netbook , is : 1 ) size -- 7 " - 12 " screen2 ) price -- under $ 6003 ) functionality -- runs the basics ( real web browser , terminal or dedicated ssh client , vnc viewer , IM , document viewers ) 4 ) shape -- the above things can also be applied to " tablets " , but the difference between a mid-range tablet and a mid-range " clamshell " is the keyboard .
The " mid-range clamshell " is a " netbook " ( with or without the swivel screen/convertible tablet capability ) .
Not a smartbook , not a sub-notebook , etc .
Those are just market-droid 's attempts to re-brand and differentiate from past models of the same thing .
It 's a netbook.I personally do n't think # 1 will ever go away , whether you call it a " netbook " , " smartbook " , or " sub-notebook " .I do n't think the price is going to really have a huge change either .
Sure , some netbooks are getting more expensive .
But , some " laptops " are also coming down to a price point that competes with netbooks.As for functionality , as time marches forward , the capabilities of devices in that size and price rang will increase .
That 's a given .
So , eventually , netbooks will run more than just the basics .
But the point is : they need to always run those basics well.So , while the marketing blurbs may change , and the exact numbers might change , I 'm willing to bet that the actual device category ( 7-12 inch screen , well under $ 100 , runs basic apps ) is here to stay .
The only thing I think that might change ... is that someone might come up with a truly compelling device that matches 1-3 , but does n't keep the keyboard .
Maybe it 'll be the EnTourage eDGe ( dual screen tablet , like the OLPC2 concept , or the Microsoft Courier ) .
Maybe it 'll be a plain tablet ( Notion Ink Adam , or the highly anticipated Apple tablet ) .
Maybe it 's something we have n't envisioned yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To me, what's important about a netbook, is:1) size -- 7" - 12" screen2) price -- under $6003) functionality -- runs the basics (real web browser, terminal or dedicated ssh client, vnc viewer, IM, document viewers)4) shape -- the above things can also be applied to "tablets", but the difference between a mid-range tablet and a mid-range "clamshell" is the keyboard.
The "mid-range clamshell" is a "netbook" (with or without the swivel screen/convertible tablet capability).
Not a smartbook, not a sub-notebook, etc.
Those are just market-droid's attempts to re-brand and differentiate from past models of the same thing.
It's a netbook.I personally don't think #1 will ever go away, whether you call it a "netbook", "smartbook", or "sub-notebook".I don't think the price is going to really have a huge change either.
Sure, some netbooks are getting more expensive.
But, some "laptops" are also coming down to a price point that competes with netbooks.As for functionality, as time marches forward, the capabilities of devices in that size and price rang will increase.
That's a given.
So, eventually, netbooks will run more than just the basics.
But the point is: they need to always run those basics well.So, while the marketing blurbs may change, and the exact numbers might change, I'm willing to bet that the actual device category (7-12 inch screen, well under $100, runs basic apps) is here to stay.
The only thing I think that might change ... is that someone might come up with a truly compelling device that matches 1-3, but doesn't keep the keyboard.
Maybe it'll be the EnTourage eDGe (dual screen tablet, like the OLPC2 concept, or the Microsoft Courier).
Maybe it'll be a plain tablet (Notion Ink Adam, or the highly anticipated Apple tablet).
Maybe it's something we haven't envisioned yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30631286</id>
	<title>Re:No, they just aren't making Netbooks</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1262529420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WTF? They aren't making basic netbooks? You can walk into any big box store in America and buy one <em>right now</em>... KMart, Wal-Mart, Target, Staples, Best Buy, Microcenter, Fry's... If there were still Circuit Shitty stores, you could get them there too. They're NOT going to do away with the $300, gutless netbooks, because there is a significant segment of the population which can't afford anything else, and they need to be selling new machines on a regular basis or they become an also-ran.</p><p>The real complaint should be the lack of <em>alternative</em> netbooks. A lot of people would probably buy one of these alleged $100 OMAP-powered netbooks even if it had big red letters on it saying "DOES NOT RUN WINDOWS SOFTWARE" so long as it came preloaded with a good set of functionality. I know I certainly would, if it had good battery life. Without an extended battery, you won't get more than about 3 hours (tops!) out of a single-core Atom netbook, even with the brightness all the way down. My 4G Surf only gets about two hours, and it's a 7", but it has the stock battery and it runs on a Mobile Celery 900. It often seems faster than my 1.6GHz Atom, but I can only assume the SSD has something to do with that. I am eagerly looking forward to the days when decent SSDs come down to reasonable prices, I've tapped out my disposable income for a while already<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:p</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF ?
They are n't making basic netbooks ?
You can walk into any big box store in America and buy one right now... KMart , Wal-Mart , Target , Staples , Best Buy , Microcenter , Fry 's... If there were still Circuit Shitty stores , you could get them there too .
They 're NOT going to do away with the $ 300 , gutless netbooks , because there is a significant segment of the population which ca n't afford anything else , and they need to be selling new machines on a regular basis or they become an also-ran.The real complaint should be the lack of alternative netbooks .
A lot of people would probably buy one of these alleged $ 100 OMAP-powered netbooks even if it had big red letters on it saying " DOES NOT RUN WINDOWS SOFTWARE " so long as it came preloaded with a good set of functionality .
I know I certainly would , if it had good battery life .
Without an extended battery , you wo n't get more than about 3 hours ( tops !
) out of a single-core Atom netbook , even with the brightness all the way down .
My 4G Surf only gets about two hours , and it 's a 7 " , but it has the stock battery and it runs on a Mobile Celery 900 .
It often seems faster than my 1.6GHz Atom , but I can only assume the SSD has something to do with that .
I am eagerly looking forward to the days when decent SSDs come down to reasonable prices , I 've tapped out my disposable income for a while already : p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF?
They aren't making basic netbooks?
You can walk into any big box store in America and buy one right now... KMart, Wal-Mart, Target, Staples, Best Buy, Microcenter, Fry's... If there were still Circuit Shitty stores, you could get them there too.
They're NOT going to do away with the $300, gutless netbooks, because there is a significant segment of the population which can't afford anything else, and they need to be selling new machines on a regular basis or they become an also-ran.The real complaint should be the lack of alternative netbooks.
A lot of people would probably buy one of these alleged $100 OMAP-powered netbooks even if it had big red letters on it saying "DOES NOT RUN WINDOWS SOFTWARE" so long as it came preloaded with a good set of functionality.
I know I certainly would, if it had good battery life.
Without an extended battery, you won't get more than about 3 hours (tops!
) out of a single-core Atom netbook, even with the brightness all the way down.
My 4G Surf only gets about two hours, and it's a 7", but it has the stock battery and it runs on a Mobile Celery 900.
It often seems faster than my 1.6GHz Atom, but I can only assume the SSD has something to do with that.
I am eagerly looking forward to the days when decent SSDs come down to reasonable prices, I've tapped out my disposable income for a while already :p</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616996</id>
	<title>Re:Your post...where to start?</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1262347980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ARM chips aren't slow. Software just isn't optimized much for them.</p><p>Your average ARM chip is as fast as an Atom, clock for clock. You can get them up to about 800mhz, so an ARM chip should perform like an 800mhz Atom.</p><p>Keeping that in mind... select lighter desktop software, and chips with mature GPU drivers.</p><p>Remember the 9.04 GMA950 debacle? 8fps in gnome... sounds just about right.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>P.S. Windows 7 is not more resource friendly than Linux. Even if you select a heavy distro like Ubuntu, that wouldn't be true. Have you even bothered to check memory usage, or compared responsiveness on systems that have GPU drivers for both OS's?</p><p>Your average linux distro <i>is</i> heavier than XP - something Linux fanboys love to deny - but claiming it's heavier than Win7 is just fallacy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ARM chips are n't slow .
Software just is n't optimized much for them.Your average ARM chip is as fast as an Atom , clock for clock .
You can get them up to about 800mhz , so an ARM chip should perform like an 800mhz Atom.Keeping that in mind... select lighter desktop software , and chips with mature GPU drivers.Remember the 9.04 GMA950 debacle ?
8fps in gnome... sounds just about right .
; ) P.S. Windows 7 is not more resource friendly than Linux .
Even if you select a heavy distro like Ubuntu , that would n't be true .
Have you even bothered to check memory usage , or compared responsiveness on systems that have GPU drivers for both OS 's ? Your average linux distro is heavier than XP - something Linux fanboys love to deny - but claiming it 's heavier than Win7 is just fallacy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ARM chips aren't slow.
Software just isn't optimized much for them.Your average ARM chip is as fast as an Atom, clock for clock.
You can get them up to about 800mhz, so an ARM chip should perform like an 800mhz Atom.Keeping that in mind... select lighter desktop software, and chips with mature GPU drivers.Remember the 9.04 GMA950 debacle?
8fps in gnome... sounds just about right.
;)P.S. Windows 7 is not more resource friendly than Linux.
Even if you select a heavy distro like Ubuntu, that wouldn't be true.
Have you even bothered to check memory usage, or compared responsiveness on systems that have GPU drivers for both OS's?Your average linux distro is heavier than XP - something Linux fanboys love to deny - but claiming it's heavier than Win7 is just fallacy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616514</id>
	<title>functionality will converge, but screens diverge</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1262343780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We are basically looking at three to four screen sizes here:
<br> (1) Desktop will be 20" - 30" because large size is an advantage, not a disadvantage.
<br> (2) Maximum-function laptop will be 15" - 17".  Anything larger is too cumbersome to transport.
<br> (3) Easy-go laptop (netbook) will be 11" or less, never larger than a standard piece of paper.
<br> (4) Cell phone screens will hold about 6", the maximum you can fit in a pocket comfortably.
<br> (5) You could have a form factor smaller than a cellphone if projection screens take-off.  I've seen demos at SIGGRAPH where you always get a perfect rectangled displayed on a desk-surface or wall, even if you have some tilt in the device.  Of course image warping will detect and compensate.
<br> In a decade all will have the computing capacity of a modest supercomputer of today and its memory capacity too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We are basically looking at three to four screen sizes here : ( 1 ) Desktop will be 20 " - 30 " because large size is an advantage , not a disadvantage .
( 2 ) Maximum-function laptop will be 15 " - 17 " .
Anything larger is too cumbersome to transport .
( 3 ) Easy-go laptop ( netbook ) will be 11 " or less , never larger than a standard piece of paper .
( 4 ) Cell phone screens will hold about 6 " , the maximum you can fit in a pocket comfortably .
( 5 ) You could have a form factor smaller than a cellphone if projection screens take-off .
I 've seen demos at SIGGRAPH where you always get a perfect rectangled displayed on a desk-surface or wall , even if you have some tilt in the device .
Of course image warping will detect and compensate .
In a decade all will have the computing capacity of a modest supercomputer of today and its memory capacity too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are basically looking at three to four screen sizes here:
 (1) Desktop will be 20" - 30" because large size is an advantage, not a disadvantage.
(2) Maximum-function laptop will be 15" - 17".
Anything larger is too cumbersome to transport.
(3) Easy-go laptop (netbook) will be 11" or less, never larger than a standard piece of paper.
(4) Cell phone screens will hold about 6", the maximum you can fit in a pocket comfortably.
(5) You could have a form factor smaller than a cellphone if projection screens take-off.
I've seen demos at SIGGRAPH where you always get a perfect rectangled displayed on a desk-surface or wall, even if you have some tilt in the device.
Of course image warping will detect and compensate.
In a decade all will have the computing capacity of a modest supercomputer of today and its memory capacity too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619420</id>
	<title>Re:predicted convergence unlikely</title>
	<author>ChunderDownunder</author>
	<datestamp>1262366400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Apple's rumored iSlate, an iPhone with ports for keyboard and monitor, may work for some but the hassle of carrying around a keyboard/monitor won't be easier than carrying around a netbook</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Supposing this product actually exists and it's a genuine 'slate', with a stylus, and not just an iPhone with a bigger on-screen keyboard, Apple would be looking to define a new market segment. i.e. replacing the A4 notepad and ink.
</p><p>
Who said anything about carrying around a keyboard and monitor? If you want to then edit your hand-scribed lecture notes in a standard computer environment, plug your iSlate into your HDTV and use your bluetooth keyboard and mouse.
</p><p>
The market segment isn't writers who want to type tomes on the go at Starbucks but rather those who wants to surf the web from one of said coffee shop's comfy lounge chairs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple 's rumored iSlate , an iPhone with ports for keyboard and monitor , may work for some but the hassle of carrying around a keyboard/monitor wo n't be easier than carrying around a netbook Supposing this product actually exists and it 's a genuine 'slate ' , with a stylus , and not just an iPhone with a bigger on-screen keyboard , Apple would be looking to define a new market segment .
i.e. replacing the A4 notepad and ink .
Who said anything about carrying around a keyboard and monitor ?
If you want to then edit your hand-scribed lecture notes in a standard computer environment , plug your iSlate into your HDTV and use your bluetooth keyboard and mouse .
The market segment is n't writers who want to type tomes on the go at Starbucks but rather those who wants to surf the web from one of said coffee shop 's comfy lounge chairs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple's rumored iSlate, an iPhone with ports for keyboard and monitor, may work for some but the hassle of carrying around a keyboard/monitor won't be easier than carrying around a netbook

Supposing this product actually exists and it's a genuine 'slate', with a stylus, and not just an iPhone with a bigger on-screen keyboard, Apple would be looking to define a new market segment.
i.e. replacing the A4 notepad and ink.
Who said anything about carrying around a keyboard and monitor?
If you want to then edit your hand-scribed lecture notes in a standard computer environment, plug your iSlate into your HDTV and use your bluetooth keyboard and mouse.
The market segment isn't writers who want to type tomes on the go at Starbucks but rather those who wants to surf the web from one of said coffee shop's comfy lounge chairs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615604</id>
	<title>I want a small light notebook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262378100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I need a real computer. I would like to be able to have it anytime, anywhere,<br>and net-connected of course.</p><p>I want to be a contributor, a producer, a writer, a creator, with my computer,<br>not just a consumer whose expresion of choice amounts to little more<br>than clicking the channel changer on the advertainment opiate-for-the-masses drip.</p><p>So I need a full keyboard or equivalent. NOT a touchscreen virtual keyboard.</p><p>I just need continued miniaturization, so that my current 4.5 pounder iBook G4 12"<br>becomes a 1 pound "wafer thing" wonder that I can stuff in a big pocket of my<br>jacket and go. But somehow, I need at LEAST 1024x768 resolution.</p><p>Hey but that's just me. Maybe the real deal will be a separate 1024x768 or better<br>tablet with a separate bluetooth fold-up keyboard optional.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I need a real computer .
I would like to be able to have it anytime , anywhere,and net-connected of course.I want to be a contributor , a producer , a writer , a creator , with my computer,not just a consumer whose expresion of choice amounts to little morethan clicking the channel changer on the advertainment opiate-for-the-masses drip.So I need a full keyboard or equivalent .
NOT a touchscreen virtual keyboard.I just need continued miniaturization , so that my current 4.5 pounder iBook G4 12 " becomes a 1 pound " wafer thing " wonder that I can stuff in a big pocket of myjacket and go .
But somehow , I need at LEAST 1024x768 resolution.Hey but that 's just me .
Maybe the real deal will be a separate 1024x768 or bettertablet with a separate bluetooth fold-up keyboard optional .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I need a real computer.
I would like to be able to have it anytime, anywhere,and net-connected of course.I want to be a contributor, a producer, a writer, a creator, with my computer,not just a consumer whose expresion of choice amounts to little morethan clicking the channel changer on the advertainment opiate-for-the-masses drip.So I need a full keyboard or equivalent.
NOT a touchscreen virtual keyboard.I just need continued miniaturization, so that my current 4.5 pounder iBook G4 12"becomes a 1 pound "wafer thing" wonder that I can stuff in a big pocket of myjacket and go.
But somehow, I need at LEAST 1024x768 resolution.Hey but that's just me.
Maybe the real deal will be a separate 1024x768 or bettertablet with a separate bluetooth fold-up keyboard optional.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615390</id>
	<title>Bullshit. It can never die.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1262376060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it fills a very important need slot : fast, small, web capable device that you can carry around and with capabilities of a normal low end office pc.</p><p>as long as people are on the move and need to connect to web from a capable device (of the capabilities of a pc), that need will never cease. its not about 'social networks' or anything, its about a very common need.</p><p>i dont know from where the shitty need to link everything with social networks and whatnot comes. probably they are just playing along with the fad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it fills a very important need slot : fast , small , web capable device that you can carry around and with capabilities of a normal low end office pc.as long as people are on the move and need to connect to web from a capable device ( of the capabilities of a pc ) , that need will never cease .
its not about 'social networks ' or anything , its about a very common need.i dont know from where the shitty need to link everything with social networks and whatnot comes .
probably they are just playing along with the fad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it fills a very important need slot : fast, small, web capable device that you can carry around and with capabilities of a normal low end office pc.as long as people are on the move and need to connect to web from a capable device (of the capabilities of a pc), that need will never cease.
its not about 'social networks' or anything, its about a very common need.i dont know from where the shitty need to link everything with social networks and whatnot comes.
probably they are just playing along with the fad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615672</id>
	<title>Tablets could be netbook killers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262378760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reading tablet with e-ink screen, internet access, typing facilities and detachable keyboard.</p><p>Netbooks may be deserting the netbook niche due to a lack of power and screen size, but the original needs inherent in netbooks (small, portable, ability to type and limited surfing) haven't gone away. Sure, consumers find that it is really convenient to do a lot more stuff on a "portable", and when you pay almost as much as for a fully powered laptop, there's no reason to have low expectations, right?</p><p>Tablets are coming in full force anyway, and adding this functionality would be cheap and simple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading tablet with e-ink screen , internet access , typing facilities and detachable keyboard.Netbooks may be deserting the netbook niche due to a lack of power and screen size , but the original needs inherent in netbooks ( small , portable , ability to type and limited surfing ) have n't gone away .
Sure , consumers find that it is really convenient to do a lot more stuff on a " portable " , and when you pay almost as much as for a fully powered laptop , there 's no reason to have low expectations , right ? Tablets are coming in full force anyway , and adding this functionality would be cheap and simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading tablet with e-ink screen, internet access, typing facilities and detachable keyboard.Netbooks may be deserting the netbook niche due to a lack of power and screen size, but the original needs inherent in netbooks (small, portable, ability to type and limited surfing) haven't gone away.
Sure, consumers find that it is really convenient to do a lot more stuff on a "portable", and when you pay almost as much as for a fully powered laptop, there's no reason to have low expectations, right?Tablets are coming in full force anyway, and adding this functionality would be cheap and simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617046</id>
	<title>there's still a niche</title>
	<author>buddyglass</author>
	<datestamp>1262348460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't own a netbook, but I've considered buying one.  Mostly for travel.  I want something small and light, that nevertheless allows me to browse the web, send email, edit documents, and maybe watch a movie.  A smart phone doesn't fit the bill, even the ones with keyboards.  The screen is too small and inputting text is a huge pain in the butt.  A normal laptop would work, but then its larger and heavier.  And, honestly, all a "real" laptop buys you is a faster cpu, which is typically not the bottleneck for the kinds of tasks I described.  That said, if I bought a netbook I'd probably try to get one that would let me swap in a faster SSD.  (Which would, yes, destroy the whole "price" advantage of a netbook.  But I wouldn't buy one because its cheap- I'd buy it because its small and light.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't own a netbook , but I 've considered buying one .
Mostly for travel .
I want something small and light , that nevertheless allows me to browse the web , send email , edit documents , and maybe watch a movie .
A smart phone does n't fit the bill , even the ones with keyboards .
The screen is too small and inputting text is a huge pain in the butt .
A normal laptop would work , but then its larger and heavier .
And , honestly , all a " real " laptop buys you is a faster cpu , which is typically not the bottleneck for the kinds of tasks I described .
That said , if I bought a netbook I 'd probably try to get one that would let me swap in a faster SSD .
( Which would , yes , destroy the whole " price " advantage of a netbook .
But I would n't buy one because its cheap- I 'd buy it because its small and light .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't own a netbook, but I've considered buying one.
Mostly for travel.
I want something small and light, that nevertheless allows me to browse the web, send email, edit documents, and maybe watch a movie.
A smart phone doesn't fit the bill, even the ones with keyboards.
The screen is too small and inputting text is a huge pain in the butt.
A normal laptop would work, but then its larger and heavier.
And, honestly, all a "real" laptop buys you is a faster cpu, which is typically not the bottleneck for the kinds of tasks I described.
That said, if I bought a netbook I'd probably try to get one that would let me swap in a faster SSD.
(Which would, yes, destroy the whole "price" advantage of a netbook.
But I wouldn't buy one because its cheap- I'd buy it because its small and light.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617584</id>
	<title>Re:No, they just aren't making Netbooks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262352480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem is the things that make a netbook so desirable by a lot of people - amazing battery life and small form factor - are being discarded by hardware makers.  They are insisting consumers want more powerful devices, so they are beefing up processor and memory which eats into battery life.  Similarly, they are insisting users need larger screens which increases form factor and also eats into battery life.</p><p>So basically hardware makers are wandering into small laptop territory, when I'm not sure the core Netbook market is really moving at all - it's just the hardware makers are moving away from it and finding people don't want what they are making as much.</p></div><p>I, as a consumer, do not want a bigger screen, just a higher resolution one. 1024xanything sucks. Give me 3200x2400 on a 10" screen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is the things that make a netbook so desirable by a lot of people - amazing battery life and small form factor - are being discarded by hardware makers .
They are insisting consumers want more powerful devices , so they are beefing up processor and memory which eats into battery life .
Similarly , they are insisting users need larger screens which increases form factor and also eats into battery life.So basically hardware makers are wandering into small laptop territory , when I 'm not sure the core Netbook market is really moving at all - it 's just the hardware makers are moving away from it and finding people do n't want what they are making as much.I , as a consumer , do not want a bigger screen , just a higher resolution one .
1024xanything sucks .
Give me 3200x2400 on a 10 " screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is the things that make a netbook so desirable by a lot of people - amazing battery life and small form factor - are being discarded by hardware makers.
They are insisting consumers want more powerful devices, so they are beefing up processor and memory which eats into battery life.
Similarly, they are insisting users need larger screens which increases form factor and also eats into battery life.So basically hardware makers are wandering into small laptop territory, when I'm not sure the core Netbook market is really moving at all - it's just the hardware makers are moving away from it and finding people don't want what they are making as much.I, as a consumer, do not want a bigger screen, just a higher resolution one.
1024xanything sucks.
Give me 3200x2400 on a 10" screen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616322</id>
	<title>Re:Wintel</title>
	<author>No. 24601</author>
	<datestamp>1262342040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Microsoft and <b>Intel</b> have been very uninterested in netbooks...</i></p><p>Sorry, w.r.t. Intel, that statement is completely false.  Intel has been a key, driving force behind the netbook phenomenon... witnessed by the AMD still not having a good competitive product for the Atom processor.</p><p>Intel is making more of a killing off the netbook market than any other company (perhaps they are making a lower profit per unit, but doing delivering higher volume).  Not to mention, these Atom/netbook sales are bootstrapping Intel's R&amp;D on future Atom or Atom-like chips that will eventually themselves into smartphones (can you smell low power x86 on a device like the iPhone??)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft and Intel have been very uninterested in netbooks...Sorry , w.r.t .
Intel , that statement is completely false .
Intel has been a key , driving force behind the netbook phenomenon... witnessed by the AMD still not having a good competitive product for the Atom processor.Intel is making more of a killing off the netbook market than any other company ( perhaps they are making a lower profit per unit , but doing delivering higher volume ) .
Not to mention , these Atom/netbook sales are bootstrapping Intel 's R&amp;D on future Atom or Atom-like chips that will eventually themselves into smartphones ( can you smell low power x86 on a device like the iPhone ? ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft and Intel have been very uninterested in netbooks...Sorry, w.r.t.
Intel, that statement is completely false.
Intel has been a key, driving force behind the netbook phenomenon... witnessed by the AMD still not having a good competitive product for the Atom processor.Intel is making more of a killing off the netbook market than any other company (perhaps they are making a lower profit per unit, but doing delivering higher volume).
Not to mention, these Atom/netbook sales are bootstrapping Intel's R&amp;D on future Atom or Atom-like chips that will eventually themselves into smartphones (can you smell low power x86 on a device like the iPhone??
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618902</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>chentiangemalc</author>
	<datestamp>1262360880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>yes things are moving to 'general computing platforms' but also moving towards 'not being good at any one thing' but being mediocre at many. while 'general computing platform' will likely to continue, i think there is some dissatisfaction i.e. mobile phone can browse the web, take photos, and videos. but it is never a good web browser, does not take good photographs, or record good videos. (some phones are more usable than others, but still even the best phones do not come close in capability to even budget versions of the 'specialized' versions of these components.</htmltext>
<tokenext>yes things are moving to 'general computing platforms ' but also moving towards 'not being good at any one thing ' but being mediocre at many .
while 'general computing platform ' will likely to continue , i think there is some dissatisfaction i.e .
mobile phone can browse the web , take photos , and videos .
but it is never a good web browser , does not take good photographs , or record good videos .
( some phones are more usable than others , but still even the best phones do not come close in capability to even budget versions of the 'specialized ' versions of these components .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes things are moving to 'general computing platforms' but also moving towards 'not being good at any one thing' but being mediocre at many.
while 'general computing platform' will likely to continue, i think there is some dissatisfaction i.e.
mobile phone can browse the web, take photos, and videos.
but it is never a good web browser, does not take good photographs, or record good videos.
(some phones are more usable than others, but still even the best phones do not come close in capability to even budget versions of the 'specialized' versions of these components.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617388</id>
	<title>Re:Netbook weirdness</title>
	<author>luther349</author>
	<datestamp>1262351040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>netbooks are proving the fact we dont need a new machine every yea. as long as it works where happy wth it. unless of course your a pc gamer thats the only market that needs new hardware often. the price point also made laptop prices fall to a all time low. a good desktop replacement laptop used to cost like 2k now around 800$.</htmltext>
<tokenext>netbooks are proving the fact we dont need a new machine every yea .
as long as it works where happy wth it .
unless of course your a pc gamer thats the only market that needs new hardware often .
the price point also made laptop prices fall to a all time low .
a good desktop replacement laptop used to cost like 2k now around 800 $ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>netbooks are proving the fact we dont need a new machine every yea.
as long as it works where happy wth it.
unless of course your a pc gamer thats the only market that needs new hardware often.
the price point also made laptop prices fall to a all time low.
a good desktop replacement laptop used to cost like 2k now around 800$.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617898</id>
	<title>Re:Rising prices?</title>
	<author>tbuskey</author>
	<datestamp>1262354400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are some netbooks over $400 out there.</p><p>I was looking to replace my aging P4 laptop with a 512MB ceiling.  I wanted a touch screen, 4 GB RAM, more then 1024x768.</p><p>I ended up getting an ARM based mid for eBooks under $240.  7" Touch screen, 800x480, 128MB RAM and WiFi.  Perfect for reading books.</p><p>I bought a dual-core laptop with 4 GB RAM and 1xxx by 768 screen for under $500.  DVD burner and 2.2 lbs</p><p>Laptops are pushing down on netbooks from the top.  I don't think the cost savings are enough for me to justify the lower CPU power, RAM limits and screen size.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some netbooks over $ 400 out there.I was looking to replace my aging P4 laptop with a 512MB ceiling .
I wanted a touch screen , 4 GB RAM , more then 1024x768.I ended up getting an ARM based mid for eBooks under $ 240 .
7 " Touch screen , 800x480 , 128MB RAM and WiFi .
Perfect for reading books.I bought a dual-core laptop with 4 GB RAM and 1xxx by 768 screen for under $ 500 .
DVD burner and 2.2 lbsLaptops are pushing down on netbooks from the top .
I do n't think the cost savings are enough for me to justify the lower CPU power , RAM limits and screen size .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some netbooks over $400 out there.I was looking to replace my aging P4 laptop with a 512MB ceiling.
I wanted a touch screen, 4 GB RAM, more then 1024x768.I ended up getting an ARM based mid for eBooks under $240.
7" Touch screen, 800x480, 128MB RAM and WiFi.
Perfect for reading books.I bought a dual-core laptop with 4 GB RAM and 1xxx by 768 screen for under $500.
DVD burner and 2.2 lbsLaptops are pushing down on netbooks from the top.
I don't think the cost savings are enough for me to justify the lower CPU power, RAM limits and screen size.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615720</id>
	<title>Nothing to see here</title>
	<author>YourExperiment</author>
	<datestamp>1262379180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's widely recognised that the netbook craze took laptop manufacturers by surprise. Sales of more expensive laptops were lost as people flocked to buy the cheap, highly portable and "good-enough" devices that they actually wanted. Now the industry is trying to kill off the monster they have created, with opinion pieces like this one. No-one's paying the slightest attention, of course - people know what they want, and they'll continue to buy it, no matter what the media tells them they ought to be doing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's widely recognised that the netbook craze took laptop manufacturers by surprise .
Sales of more expensive laptops were lost as people flocked to buy the cheap , highly portable and " good-enough " devices that they actually wanted .
Now the industry is trying to kill off the monster they have created , with opinion pieces like this one .
No-one 's paying the slightest attention , of course - people know what they want , and they 'll continue to buy it , no matter what the media tells them they ought to be doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's widely recognised that the netbook craze took laptop manufacturers by surprise.
Sales of more expensive laptops were lost as people flocked to buy the cheap, highly portable and "good-enough" devices that they actually wanted.
Now the industry is trying to kill off the monster they have created, with opinion pieces like this one.
No-one's paying the slightest attention, of course - people know what they want, and they'll continue to buy it, no matter what the media tells them they ought to be doing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615466</id>
	<title>Blame intel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just look at their newest atom offering, its deliberately poor. They are also not releasing duel core netbook atoms anymore(they will only allow them for desktop solutions). Why? It doesn't fit their business model and they want to sell expensive notebooks and desktops with their crappy chipsets. If you want a better chipset (say from nvidia) then you have to pay more for the atom. Also Microsoft pushing vendors to use windows 7 and not xp or linux. Due to all this vendor bullying the price has been inflated massively.</p><p>My eee901 can play a plethora of decent 3d games and is surprisingly powerful, full screen movies work fine and the screen is a great size and it has a ~8 hour battery life. It fits all the requirements I have of it. I can buy a similar netbook with the exact same components today and pay twice the price I paid for the 901.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just look at their newest atom offering , its deliberately poor .
They are also not releasing duel core netbook atoms anymore ( they will only allow them for desktop solutions ) .
Why ? It does n't fit their business model and they want to sell expensive notebooks and desktops with their crappy chipsets .
If you want a better chipset ( say from nvidia ) then you have to pay more for the atom .
Also Microsoft pushing vendors to use windows 7 and not xp or linux .
Due to all this vendor bullying the price has been inflated massively.My eee901 can play a plethora of decent 3d games and is surprisingly powerful , full screen movies work fine and the screen is a great size and it has a ~ 8 hour battery life .
It fits all the requirements I have of it .
I can buy a similar netbook with the exact same components today and pay twice the price I paid for the 901 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just look at their newest atom offering, its deliberately poor.
They are also not releasing duel core netbook atoms anymore(they will only allow them for desktop solutions).
Why? It doesn't fit their business model and they want to sell expensive notebooks and desktops with their crappy chipsets.
If you want a better chipset (say from nvidia) then you have to pay more for the atom.
Also Microsoft pushing vendors to use windows 7 and not xp or linux.
Due to all this vendor bullying the price has been inflated massively.My eee901 can play a plethora of decent 3d games and is surprisingly powerful, full screen movies work fine and the screen is a great size and it has a ~8 hour battery life.
It fits all the requirements I have of it.
I can buy a similar netbook with the exact same components today and pay twice the price I paid for the 901.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30629028</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>segin</author>
	<datestamp>1262450520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They will stop selling systems with floppy disks when nobody cares about them</p></div><p>My mother has a newer PC that came stock without a floppy drive, and once I was at the local community college, and I assisted the librarian in setting up some Dell systems that not only lacked floppy drives, but PS/2 ports! So, I guess you can say that this prediction has already came to pass.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They will stop selling systems with floppy disks when nobody cares about themMy mother has a newer PC that came stock without a floppy drive , and once I was at the local community college , and I assisted the librarian in setting up some Dell systems that not only lacked floppy drives , but PS/2 ports !
So , I guess you can say that this prediction has already came to pass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will stop selling systems with floppy disks when nobody cares about themMy mother has a newer PC that came stock without a floppy drive, and once I was at the local community college, and I assisted the librarian in setting up some Dell systems that not only lacked floppy drives, but PS/2 ports!
So, I guess you can say that this prediction has already came to pass.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618850</id>
	<title>Re:Blame Intel... and the manufacturers...</title>
	<author>hughperkins</author>
	<datestamp>1262360400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an EEEPc 901, 9 inch screen, as my main (only) pc for 12 months now, using it about 8 hours a day.</p><p>On this tiny pc, I can:<br>- compile SpringRTS, write AIs in Java for it, run Eclipse in parallel, and mysql or postgres<br>- run Eclipse + Glassfish<br>- run apache + php + postgres/mysql<br>- watch videos<br>- use chat, Skype, email, read slashdot<br>- run VirtualBox, run multiple OSes in parallel<br>- read books</p><p>If I need a bit of extra juice, I can just ssh into Amazon EC2, for trivial amounts of money.</p><p>It weighs the same as a book, it's always with me, at all times.  It's awesome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an EEEPc 901 , 9 inch screen , as my main ( only ) pc for 12 months now , using it about 8 hours a day.On this tiny pc , I can : - compile SpringRTS , write AIs in Java for it , run Eclipse in parallel , and mysql or postgres- run Eclipse + Glassfish- run apache + php + postgres/mysql- watch videos- use chat , Skype , email , read slashdot- run VirtualBox , run multiple OSes in parallel- read booksIf I need a bit of extra juice , I can just ssh into Amazon EC2 , for trivial amounts of money.It weighs the same as a book , it 's always with me , at all times .
It 's awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an EEEPc 901, 9 inch screen, as my main (only) pc for 12 months now, using it about 8 hours a day.On this tiny pc, I can:- compile SpringRTS, write AIs in Java for it, run Eclipse in parallel, and mysql or postgres- run Eclipse + Glassfish- run apache + php + postgres/mysql- watch videos- use chat, Skype, email, read slashdot- run VirtualBox, run multiple OSes in parallel- read booksIf I need a bit of extra juice, I can just ssh into Amazon EC2, for trivial amounts of money.It weighs the same as a book, it's always with me, at all times.
It's awesome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616452</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>starfishsystems</author>
	<datestamp>1262343300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Totally with you on this.
<br> <br>
There is no substitute for having a <i>general-purpose programmable device</i>, in other words a computer, because it realizes the ideal of limitless adaptive capability.  Everything else - form factor, weight, battery life, link speed, keyboard size, screen size, audio quality, you name it - can be viewed as a constraint on that capabilility.
<br> <br>
Okay, that's a bit of hyperbole there.  But still, it's useful to think in terms of reducing constraints and not just adding features.  That's why the idea of having multiple devices to deliver multiple features fundamentally makes no sense.  It's not just the clutter and burden of it all, it's the lack of integration which places a constraint on capability.
<br> <br>
Take measuring instruments, for example.  Which would be more useful, an air pollution sensor with its own little keyboard and screen, or a sensor which interfaces to your personal compute node which also - by the way - has access to a GPS receiver?
<br> <br>
It's in the integration of this data where patterns can be detected.  The data is already lying out there in the universe, we might say, only needing to be sensed.  Some of our artifacts get in the way of sensing that data more than others.  Why constrain it to a linear stream of samples on an isolated device when it could be had as a spatial map all ready for further processing?  And any <i>ad hoc</i> integration, no matter how prosaic, requires a similar kind of general capability.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Totally with you on this .
There is no substitute for having a general-purpose programmable device , in other words a computer , because it realizes the ideal of limitless adaptive capability .
Everything else - form factor , weight , battery life , link speed , keyboard size , screen size , audio quality , you name it - can be viewed as a constraint on that capabilility .
Okay , that 's a bit of hyperbole there .
But still , it 's useful to think in terms of reducing constraints and not just adding features .
That 's why the idea of having multiple devices to deliver multiple features fundamentally makes no sense .
It 's not just the clutter and burden of it all , it 's the lack of integration which places a constraint on capability .
Take measuring instruments , for example .
Which would be more useful , an air pollution sensor with its own little keyboard and screen , or a sensor which interfaces to your personal compute node which also - by the way - has access to a GPS receiver ?
It 's in the integration of this data where patterns can be detected .
The data is already lying out there in the universe , we might say , only needing to be sensed .
Some of our artifacts get in the way of sensing that data more than others .
Why constrain it to a linear stream of samples on an isolated device when it could be had as a spatial map all ready for further processing ?
And any ad hoc integration , no matter how prosaic , requires a similar kind of general capability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Totally with you on this.
There is no substitute for having a general-purpose programmable device, in other words a computer, because it realizes the ideal of limitless adaptive capability.
Everything else - form factor, weight, battery life, link speed, keyboard size, screen size, audio quality, you name it - can be viewed as a constraint on that capabilility.
Okay, that's a bit of hyperbole there.
But still, it's useful to think in terms of reducing constraints and not just adding features.
That's why the idea of having multiple devices to deliver multiple features fundamentally makes no sense.
It's not just the clutter and burden of it all, it's the lack of integration which places a constraint on capability.
Take measuring instruments, for example.
Which would be more useful, an air pollution sensor with its own little keyboard and screen, or a sensor which interfaces to your personal compute node which also - by the way - has access to a GPS receiver?
It's in the integration of this data where patterns can be detected.
The data is already lying out there in the universe, we might say, only needing to be sensed.
Some of our artifacts get in the way of sensing that data more than others.
Why constrain it to a linear stream of samples on an isolated device when it could be had as a spatial map all ready for further processing?
And any ad hoc integration, no matter how prosaic, requires a similar kind of general capability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262377020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They've been predicting the "specialized computer" for 25 years now, and what's actually happened is that even specialized devices like cell phones and music players are in fact evolving towards becoming general computing platforms.  In other words, this guy is completely wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 've been predicting the " specialized computer " for 25 years now , and what 's actually happened is that even specialized devices like cell phones and music players are in fact evolving towards becoming general computing platforms .
In other words , this guy is completely wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They've been predicting the "specialized computer" for 25 years now, and what's actually happened is that even specialized devices like cell phones and music players are in fact evolving towards becoming general computing platforms.
In other words, this guy is completely wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615636</id>
	<title>Netbook weirdness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262378400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is it with all the netbook weirdness.</p><p>I have an Eee 900 20G. Basically it is a small, cheap, very light, well built machine with a moderate battery life. It can combine those properties because it was very low spec compared to its contemporaries. Other than that, it is just a laptop. There are no restriction or lack of featuers. It is just a laptop.</p><p>I happen to like it because I don't require a fast machine or a large screen. Therefore it is better than almost all other laptops (for me) because it nails the specs I do care about.</p><p>When I am at home, I plug it in to an external monitor and DVD drive and it works well as my home (entertainment) computer.</p><p>I can't believe I am the only person in the world who does not need a fast machine. I have particular trouble believing it because they sold so very well.</p><p>I can see that the netbook markey it "dieing" mainly because the speed, size, weight and cost has gone up, making them merge with the normal laptop segment. There's therefore nothing to distinguish them from normal laptops. But when they were small, cheap and light they sold well.</p><p>The great thing about generic PCs is that they span niches from Vortex86, PC/104, through to laptops (with any practical range of speed, weight, battery life, cost size), luggables, desktops (from tiny Via<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/atom to quad socket behemoths) through to servers in as many shapes and sizes.</p><p>Why does this particular combination of weight, speed, size and cost seem to cause so much consternation?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is it with all the netbook weirdness.I have an Eee 900 20G .
Basically it is a small , cheap , very light , well built machine with a moderate battery life .
It can combine those properties because it was very low spec compared to its contemporaries .
Other than that , it is just a laptop .
There are no restriction or lack of featuers .
It is just a laptop.I happen to like it because I do n't require a fast machine or a large screen .
Therefore it is better than almost all other laptops ( for me ) because it nails the specs I do care about.When I am at home , I plug it in to an external monitor and DVD drive and it works well as my home ( entertainment ) computer.I ca n't believe I am the only person in the world who does not need a fast machine .
I have particular trouble believing it because they sold so very well.I can see that the netbook markey it " dieing " mainly because the speed , size , weight and cost has gone up , making them merge with the normal laptop segment .
There 's therefore nothing to distinguish them from normal laptops .
But when they were small , cheap and light they sold well.The great thing about generic PCs is that they span niches from Vortex86 , PC/104 , through to laptops ( with any practical range of speed , weight , battery life , cost size ) , luggables , desktops ( from tiny Via /atom to quad socket behemoths ) through to servers in as many shapes and sizes.Why does this particular combination of weight , speed , size and cost seem to cause so much consternation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is it with all the netbook weirdness.I have an Eee 900 20G.
Basically it is a small, cheap, very light, well built machine with a moderate battery life.
It can combine those properties because it was very low spec compared to its contemporaries.
Other than that, it is just a laptop.
There are no restriction or lack of featuers.
It is just a laptop.I happen to like it because I don't require a fast machine or a large screen.
Therefore it is better than almost all other laptops (for me) because it nails the specs I do care about.When I am at home, I plug it in to an external monitor and DVD drive and it works well as my home (entertainment) computer.I can't believe I am the only person in the world who does not need a fast machine.
I have particular trouble believing it because they sold so very well.I can see that the netbook markey it "dieing" mainly because the speed, size, weight and cost has gone up, making them merge with the normal laptop segment.
There's therefore nothing to distinguish them from normal laptops.
But when they were small, cheap and light they sold well.The great thing about generic PCs is that they span niches from Vortex86, PC/104, through to laptops (with any practical range of speed, weight, battery life, cost size), luggables, desktops (from tiny Via /atom to quad socket behemoths) through to servers in as many shapes and sizes.Why does this particular combination of weight, speed, size and cost seem to cause so much consternation?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618704</id>
	<title>Classic Gaming Revival Device?</title>
	<author>segin</author>
	<datestamp>1262359380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The netbook might survive as a gamer's friend. How so? By making netbooks to PCs as PSPs are to PSones. A lot of classic PSone games were eventually ported to the later PSP, generally with only cosmetic changes to fit the slightly smaller screen, a good example being Breath of Fire III. Go back about 6-7 years, and you will find a plethora of PC games that will run smoothly on most netbooks. I own an Acer Aspire One AOA150, and I can play, on a regular basis, World of Warcraft, Sims 2, Simcity 4 Deluxe, Emperor: Battle for Dune, Star Trek: Armada II, Warcraft III (with The Frozen Throne expansion), DOOM (via Doomsday Engine / jDoom). All of these games perform rather well, at a reasonable framerate (15fps or more), and generally will fit on the unit's hard drive (if you get the old mechanical variety of hard disk, common seem to be 160GB SATA disks).</p><p>For those games that need CD-ROM drives, Alcohol 120\%, PowerISO, etc. becomes your friend. Either that, or an external USB CD-ROM drive or casing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The netbook might survive as a gamer 's friend .
How so ?
By making netbooks to PCs as PSPs are to PSones .
A lot of classic PSone games were eventually ported to the later PSP , generally with only cosmetic changes to fit the slightly smaller screen , a good example being Breath of Fire III .
Go back about 6-7 years , and you will find a plethora of PC games that will run smoothly on most netbooks .
I own an Acer Aspire One AOA150 , and I can play , on a regular basis , World of Warcraft , Sims 2 , Simcity 4 Deluxe , Emperor : Battle for Dune , Star Trek : Armada II , Warcraft III ( with The Frozen Throne expansion ) , DOOM ( via Doomsday Engine / jDoom ) .
All of these games perform rather well , at a reasonable framerate ( 15fps or more ) , and generally will fit on the unit 's hard drive ( if you get the old mechanical variety of hard disk , common seem to be 160GB SATA disks ) .For those games that need CD-ROM drives , Alcohol 120 \ % , PowerISO , etc .
becomes your friend .
Either that , or an external USB CD-ROM drive or casing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The netbook might survive as a gamer's friend.
How so?
By making netbooks to PCs as PSPs are to PSones.
A lot of classic PSone games were eventually ported to the later PSP, generally with only cosmetic changes to fit the slightly smaller screen, a good example being Breath of Fire III.
Go back about 6-7 years, and you will find a plethora of PC games that will run smoothly on most netbooks.
I own an Acer Aspire One AOA150, and I can play, on a regular basis, World of Warcraft, Sims 2, Simcity 4 Deluxe, Emperor: Battle for Dune, Star Trek: Armada II, Warcraft III (with The Frozen Throne expansion), DOOM (via Doomsday Engine / jDoom).
All of these games perform rather well, at a reasonable framerate (15fps or more), and generally will fit on the unit's hard drive (if you get the old mechanical variety of hard disk, common seem to be 160GB SATA disks).For those games that need CD-ROM drives, Alcohol 120\%, PowerISO, etc.
becomes your friend.
Either that, or an external USB CD-ROM drive or casing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30623422</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>genericpoweruser</author>
	<datestamp>1262455080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For Slashdot users who want something like this but at an even lower price point, you might like to know about the Zipit, which can be modded to run Linux. <a href="http://hunterdavis.com/archives/227" title="hunterdavis.com" rel="nofollow">http://hunterdavis.com/archives/227</a> [hunterdavis.com]<br>I have one and I love it. It's not for everybody (very low specs for a general purpose device) so you won't want to run X probably (though it can). Have fun!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For Slashdot users who want something like this but at an even lower price point , you might like to know about the Zipit , which can be modded to run Linux .
http : //hunterdavis.com/archives/227 [ hunterdavis.com ] I have one and I love it .
It 's not for everybody ( very low specs for a general purpose device ) so you wo n't want to run X probably ( though it can ) .
Have fun !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For Slashdot users who want something like this but at an even lower price point, you might like to know about the Zipit, which can be modded to run Linux.
http://hunterdavis.com/archives/227 [hunterdavis.com]I have one and I love it.
It's not for everybody (very low specs for a general purpose device) so you won't want to run X probably (though it can).
Have fun!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619224</id>
	<title>Netbooks are here to stay</title>
	<author>lsatenstein</author>
	<datestamp>1262364240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Has anyone looked at Google OS and Chrome and where Google thinks computing is going?  The netbook will serve as an efficient web browser with a 8 to 15 hour battery life between charges.

Sigh, It is rough to know what the future will unroll in terms of discoveries.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone looked at Google OS and Chrome and where Google thinks computing is going ?
The netbook will serve as an efficient web browser with a 8 to 15 hour battery life between charges .
Sigh , It is rough to know what the future will unroll in terms of discoveries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone looked at Google OS and Chrome and where Google thinks computing is going?
The netbook will serve as an efficient web browser with a 8 to 15 hour battery life between charges.
Sigh, It is rough to know what the future will unroll in terms of discoveries.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615694</id>
	<title>Re:failure due to high cost, poor quality</title>
	<author>jmorris42</author>
	<datestamp>1262378880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; It is not clear if the net book is a good idea,...</p><p>If you are a customer it is clear, customers bought the crap outta them.  If you are a PC maker it was clear they were a danger and to Microsoft they are a mortal threat.  Understand this difference in perspective and everything is clear.</p><p>The first attack was Microsoft insisting that netbooks run Windows by threatening the venders OEM deals on their other more profitable lines and on the other hand essentially giving XP away for less than the bundleware.   Then, because the original netbooks couldn't really run XP well it gave them the excuse they were looking for to redefine the term into meaninglessness.  Now a 'netbook' is any lower end notebook without an optical drive.</p><p>remember the original eeePC was aiming at a low price, small and light and basic web access.  Not many 'netbooks' meet that definition.</p><p>Now look at the inbound ARM wave.  Already the attacks are beginning to ensure none are something customers will like.  Linux is out, I doubt any will run it.  Google doesn't really count, by the time they got through with it customers lose all of it's benefits and and only have the dubious privacy invading Google features.  And while we wait for Chrome to emerge from the vapor, note how even the generic Chinese crap suddenly stopped loading Linux in favor of WinCE.  And while ARM should have allowed new low price points to be hit, again that isn't what seems to be the plan.  Upcoming product will be expensive high powered HD video chomping stuff subsidized by cell carriers with battery life the only killer feature to try tackling the mighty Wintel duopoly.  Anyone smell the fail yet?</p><p>Put out a sub kilogram machine with better than eight (real world) hours of runtime, a week of standby, and good enough computing to do web browsing and light productivity and I suspect you would find youself in original eeePC 900 territory, unable to make enough to satisfy demand the first year.  But I doubt it will ever get built.  A year ago I figured some generic Chinese factory with no need to worry about Microsoft would eventually make one and it would find distribution through channels that don't have a current notebook line to worry about it being canibalized.  But watching how fast CE monopolized the generic machines I now see there isn't any such factory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; It is not clear if the net book is a good idea,...If you are a customer it is clear , customers bought the crap outta them .
If you are a PC maker it was clear they were a danger and to Microsoft they are a mortal threat .
Understand this difference in perspective and everything is clear.The first attack was Microsoft insisting that netbooks run Windows by threatening the venders OEM deals on their other more profitable lines and on the other hand essentially giving XP away for less than the bundleware .
Then , because the original netbooks could n't really run XP well it gave them the excuse they were looking for to redefine the term into meaninglessness .
Now a 'netbook ' is any lower end notebook without an optical drive.remember the original eeePC was aiming at a low price , small and light and basic web access .
Not many 'netbooks ' meet that definition.Now look at the inbound ARM wave .
Already the attacks are beginning to ensure none are something customers will like .
Linux is out , I doubt any will run it .
Google does n't really count , by the time they got through with it customers lose all of it 's benefits and and only have the dubious privacy invading Google features .
And while we wait for Chrome to emerge from the vapor , note how even the generic Chinese crap suddenly stopped loading Linux in favor of WinCE .
And while ARM should have allowed new low price points to be hit , again that is n't what seems to be the plan .
Upcoming product will be expensive high powered HD video chomping stuff subsidized by cell carriers with battery life the only killer feature to try tackling the mighty Wintel duopoly .
Anyone smell the fail yet ? Put out a sub kilogram machine with better than eight ( real world ) hours of runtime , a week of standby , and good enough computing to do web browsing and light productivity and I suspect you would find youself in original eeePC 900 territory , unable to make enough to satisfy demand the first year .
But I doubt it will ever get built .
A year ago I figured some generic Chinese factory with no need to worry about Microsoft would eventually make one and it would find distribution through channels that do n't have a current notebook line to worry about it being canibalized .
But watching how fast CE monopolized the generic machines I now see there is n't any such factory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; It is not clear if the net book is a good idea,...If you are a customer it is clear, customers bought the crap outta them.
If you are a PC maker it was clear they were a danger and to Microsoft they are a mortal threat.
Understand this difference in perspective and everything is clear.The first attack was Microsoft insisting that netbooks run Windows by threatening the venders OEM deals on their other more profitable lines and on the other hand essentially giving XP away for less than the bundleware.
Then, because the original netbooks couldn't really run XP well it gave them the excuse they were looking for to redefine the term into meaninglessness.
Now a 'netbook' is any lower end notebook without an optical drive.remember the original eeePC was aiming at a low price, small and light and basic web access.
Not many 'netbooks' meet that definition.Now look at the inbound ARM wave.
Already the attacks are beginning to ensure none are something customers will like.
Linux is out, I doubt any will run it.
Google doesn't really count, by the time they got through with it customers lose all of it's benefits and and only have the dubious privacy invading Google features.
And while we wait for Chrome to emerge from the vapor, note how even the generic Chinese crap suddenly stopped loading Linux in favor of WinCE.
And while ARM should have allowed new low price points to be hit, again that isn't what seems to be the plan.
Upcoming product will be expensive high powered HD video chomping stuff subsidized by cell carriers with battery life the only killer feature to try tackling the mighty Wintel duopoly.
Anyone smell the fail yet?Put out a sub kilogram machine with better than eight (real world) hours of runtime, a week of standby, and good enough computing to do web browsing and light productivity and I suspect you would find youself in original eeePC 900 territory, unable to make enough to satisfy demand the first year.
But I doubt it will ever get built.
A year ago I figured some generic Chinese factory with no need to worry about Microsoft would eventually make one and it would find distribution through channels that don't have a current notebook line to worry about it being canibalized.
But watching how fast CE monopolized the generic machines I now see there isn't any such factory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616330</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit. It can never die.</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1262342160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>it fills a very important need slot : fast, small, web capable device that you can carry around and with capabilities of a normal low end office pc.</i></p><p>That niche is also filled by the smart phone. Smart phones are just getting more capable, and they have the size advantage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it fills a very important need slot : fast , small , web capable device that you can carry around and with capabilities of a normal low end office pc.That niche is also filled by the smart phone .
Smart phones are just getting more capable , and they have the size advantage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it fills a very important need slot : fast, small, web capable device that you can carry around and with capabilities of a normal low end office pc.That niche is also filled by the smart phone.
Smart phones are just getting more capable, and they have the size advantage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615530</id>
	<title>Blame Intel... and the manufacturers...</title>
	<author>Aphrika</author>
	<datestamp>1262377200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>We've had the Atom for about 18 months now, and it's about to be replaced by a newer version that... runs at the same speed.<br> <br>This is where the major problem lies. Those 18 months have seen CULV CPUs come down in price and go up in performance, but the Atom is sat there anchored to a 1.6GHz speed, most likely for another year or so. The other kicker is that the 7" and 9" machines with SSDs were soon replaced by 10" and 12" models with HDDs which blurs the line considerably to the extent that a netbook is now just a laptop with a slow CPU. The benefits of the small footprint and limitations of small storage have been lost.<br> <br>Some people will still say that they can do all their basic stuff on a netbook, but when you can fork out an extra $100 and get something like a Dell 11z or 13z (Core 2 Duo 1.3GHz, 9 hour battery life), I really don't see the point.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've had the Atom for about 18 months now , and it 's about to be replaced by a newer version that... runs at the same speed .
This is where the major problem lies .
Those 18 months have seen CULV CPUs come down in price and go up in performance , but the Atom is sat there anchored to a 1.6GHz speed , most likely for another year or so .
The other kicker is that the 7 " and 9 " machines with SSDs were soon replaced by 10 " and 12 " models with HDDs which blurs the line considerably to the extent that a netbook is now just a laptop with a slow CPU .
The benefits of the small footprint and limitations of small storage have been lost .
Some people will still say that they can do all their basic stuff on a netbook , but when you can fork out an extra $ 100 and get something like a Dell 11z or 13z ( Core 2 Duo 1.3GHz , 9 hour battery life ) , I really do n't see the point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've had the Atom for about 18 months now, and it's about to be replaced by a newer version that... runs at the same speed.
This is where the major problem lies.
Those 18 months have seen CULV CPUs come down in price and go up in performance, but the Atom is sat there anchored to a 1.6GHz speed, most likely for another year or so.
The other kicker is that the 7" and 9" machines with SSDs were soon replaced by 10" and 12" models with HDDs which blurs the line considerably to the extent that a netbook is now just a laptop with a slow CPU.
The benefits of the small footprint and limitations of small storage have been lost.
Some people will still say that they can do all their basic stuff on a netbook, but when you can fork out an extra $100 and get something like a Dell 11z or 13z (Core 2 Duo 1.3GHz, 9 hour battery life), I really don't see the point.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616648</id>
	<title>Re:Rising prices?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262345100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't $250CAN more than $399USD these days?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't $ 250CAN more than $ 399USD these days ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't $250CAN more than $399USD these days?
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620360</id>
	<title>Re:Here we go again...Arm had their chance</title>
	<author>narcc</author>
	<datestamp>1262465160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While I agree that the netbook as it is now will change and evolve, there is now a proven niche for low-mid cost devices that can do basic computer tasks</p></div><p>This is what I don't understand.  10 years ago, the low-end netbooks of today would have been considered unimaginably powerful machines.  1.6ghz processor, which you couldn't buy back then at any price, 1gb of ram (WOW!) 160gb of disk space!</p><p>What are we doing differently *now* than we were 10 years ago?  Youtube?  Just a band-width issue.  Social networking?  That's well within the capabilities of the web in 2000 -- even a good number of years before than that. Video editing?  That's been well within the reach of the home user for more than a decade.</p><p>For the average business user, the changes have been even less exciting.  They do the exact same tasks as before, with no significant improvement.  Email, word processing, and spreadsheets haven't changed -- Small businesses still use Quicken and similar programs for the same kinds of tasks they've always used it for (with no notable advantages in the new versions).  The only reason most business upgrade seems to be file format compatibility and upgrades to industry specific software.</p><p>Outside of playing modern video games (Who really buys a portable computer for that? Buy a damn nintendo or whatever it is you play games on nowadays.  It'll probably be cheaper than the latest graphics card anyhow.) What qualifies as a NON-basic computer task?  What does a netbook NOT do that a regular laptop can?</p><p>I have a netbook for travel.  It's nothing special as far as netbooks go, but I find myself using it more and more when I'm not traveling.  I haven't had any of the problems with flash or other video like some of the other posters have suggested (neither does my wife, who watches lots of videos on her netbook)  It took me about two weeks to get used to the smaller keyboard and the tiny touchpad (which I hated at first, but it feels natural now)  When I need a larger display, it takes seconds to plug in to a normal monitor -- or pop in a usb keyboard/mouse (which I've haven't felt the need to do for some time).</p><p>Really, I haven't found any task that it isn't suited to (well, blackberry media manager refuses to run if I don't have it plugged in to a larger screen, but that's BB's fault for making stupid assumptions about their users.  It's also the only problem I've ever had.)  I haven't been crying out for more power or speed -- it "feels" faster than my vista computer.  (My wife runs linux on her netbook and never touches her vista laptop!  While it's a newer and more powerful machine, she says it's just too slow for her.)</p><p>I keep hearing how netbooks are only good for "simple" or casual computing tasks.  I just don't see any reason that this true.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I agree that the netbook as it is now will change and evolve , there is now a proven niche for low-mid cost devices that can do basic computer tasksThis is what I do n't understand .
10 years ago , the low-end netbooks of today would have been considered unimaginably powerful machines .
1.6ghz processor , which you could n't buy back then at any price , 1gb of ram ( WOW !
) 160gb of disk space ! What are we doing differently * now * than we were 10 years ago ?
Youtube ? Just a band-width issue .
Social networking ?
That 's well within the capabilities of the web in 2000 -- even a good number of years before than that .
Video editing ?
That 's been well within the reach of the home user for more than a decade.For the average business user , the changes have been even less exciting .
They do the exact same tasks as before , with no significant improvement .
Email , word processing , and spreadsheets have n't changed -- Small businesses still use Quicken and similar programs for the same kinds of tasks they 've always used it for ( with no notable advantages in the new versions ) .
The only reason most business upgrade seems to be file format compatibility and upgrades to industry specific software.Outside of playing modern video games ( Who really buys a portable computer for that ?
Buy a damn nintendo or whatever it is you play games on nowadays .
It 'll probably be cheaper than the latest graphics card anyhow .
) What qualifies as a NON-basic computer task ?
What does a netbook NOT do that a regular laptop can ? I have a netbook for travel .
It 's nothing special as far as netbooks go , but I find myself using it more and more when I 'm not traveling .
I have n't had any of the problems with flash or other video like some of the other posters have suggested ( neither does my wife , who watches lots of videos on her netbook ) It took me about two weeks to get used to the smaller keyboard and the tiny touchpad ( which I hated at first , but it feels natural now ) When I need a larger display , it takes seconds to plug in to a normal monitor -- or pop in a usb keyboard/mouse ( which I 've have n't felt the need to do for some time ) .Really , I have n't found any task that it is n't suited to ( well , blackberry media manager refuses to run if I do n't have it plugged in to a larger screen , but that 's BB 's fault for making stupid assumptions about their users .
It 's also the only problem I 've ever had .
) I have n't been crying out for more power or speed -- it " feels " faster than my vista computer .
( My wife runs linux on her netbook and never touches her vista laptop !
While it 's a newer and more powerful machine , she says it 's just too slow for her .
) I keep hearing how netbooks are only good for " simple " or casual computing tasks .
I just do n't see any reason that this true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I agree that the netbook as it is now will change and evolve, there is now a proven niche for low-mid cost devices that can do basic computer tasksThis is what I don't understand.
10 years ago, the low-end netbooks of today would have been considered unimaginably powerful machines.
1.6ghz processor, which you couldn't buy back then at any price, 1gb of ram (WOW!
) 160gb of disk space!What are we doing differently *now* than we were 10 years ago?
Youtube?  Just a band-width issue.
Social networking?
That's well within the capabilities of the web in 2000 -- even a good number of years before than that.
Video editing?
That's been well within the reach of the home user for more than a decade.For the average business user, the changes have been even less exciting.
They do the exact same tasks as before, with no significant improvement.
Email, word processing, and spreadsheets haven't changed -- Small businesses still use Quicken and similar programs for the same kinds of tasks they've always used it for (with no notable advantages in the new versions).
The only reason most business upgrade seems to be file format compatibility and upgrades to industry specific software.Outside of playing modern video games (Who really buys a portable computer for that?
Buy a damn nintendo or whatever it is you play games on nowadays.
It'll probably be cheaper than the latest graphics card anyhow.
) What qualifies as a NON-basic computer task?
What does a netbook NOT do that a regular laptop can?I have a netbook for travel.
It's nothing special as far as netbooks go, but I find myself using it more and more when I'm not traveling.
I haven't had any of the problems with flash or other video like some of the other posters have suggested (neither does my wife, who watches lots of videos on her netbook)  It took me about two weeks to get used to the smaller keyboard and the tiny touchpad (which I hated at first, but it feels natural now)  When I need a larger display, it takes seconds to plug in to a normal monitor -- or pop in a usb keyboard/mouse (which I've haven't felt the need to do for some time).Really, I haven't found any task that it isn't suited to (well, blackberry media manager refuses to run if I don't have it plugged in to a larger screen, but that's BB's fault for making stupid assumptions about their users.
It's also the only problem I've ever had.
)  I haven't been crying out for more power or speed -- it "feels" faster than my vista computer.
(My wife runs linux on her netbook and never touches her vista laptop!
While it's a newer and more powerful machine, she says it's just too slow for her.
)I keep hearing how netbooks are only good for "simple" or casual computing tasks.
I just don't see any reason that this true.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618924</id>
	<title>Netbooks are ideal thin clients</title>
	<author>fragMasterFlash</author>
	<datestamp>1262361060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As more computationally intensive applications migrate their heavy lifting to the cloud the thin-client paradigm becomes much more compelling. I'm certain that CPU/chipset vendors would gladly accept the low margins associated with netbook &amp; nettop machines if there is a corresponding uptick in the enterprise server market.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As more computationally intensive applications migrate their heavy lifting to the cloud the thin-client paradigm becomes much more compelling .
I 'm certain that CPU/chipset vendors would gladly accept the low margins associated with netbook &amp; nettop machines if there is a corresponding uptick in the enterprise server market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As more computationally intensive applications migrate their heavy lifting to the cloud the thin-client paradigm becomes much more compelling.
I'm certain that CPU/chipset vendors would gladly accept the low margins associated with netbook &amp; nettop machines if there is a corresponding uptick in the enterprise server market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617510</id>
	<title>Wiser words rarely have being said</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1262352000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We have failed the consumer because we have imposed constraints on them,'"</p><p>Absolutely.</p><p>Instead of  investing heavily in lightweight operating systems for these machines, you took away Linux and installed Microsoft sloware.</p><p>That is the biggest constraint with which consumers have been burdened.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We have failed the consumer because we have imposed constraints on them, ' " Absolutely.Instead of investing heavily in lightweight operating systems for these machines , you took away Linux and installed Microsoft sloware.That is the biggest constraint with which consumers have been burdened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We have failed the consumer because we have imposed constraints on them,'"Absolutely.Instead of  investing heavily in lightweight operating systems for these machines, you took away Linux and installed Microsoft sloware.That is the biggest constraint with which consumers have been burdened.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617870</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>medelliadegray</author>
	<datestamp>1262354280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The netbook is only going to grow, so long as companies keep making more and more apps for linux, xor companies keep moving their applications onto the web. There's only the balance then of what does a consumer need to run locally versus connected.</p><p>Your prediction of low margins may be true to a point---but that is the beauty of globalization. These US companies who want to make only huge profit items will eventually wither from a thousand cuts as Taiwan/Chinese companies decide their happy to make 10 million netbooks with a net profit of 3 bucks each.</p><p>If you need specialization, then you're going to pay through the teeth (GPS Navigation / E-Readers). Those companies make a killing on you from both software and hardware. Personally, i wont touch e-readers until they allow me to place them onto a general-computing device.  Same reason I've never toughed DRM-Music.... its too expensive and too limiting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The netbook is only going to grow , so long as companies keep making more and more apps for linux , xor companies keep moving their applications onto the web .
There 's only the balance then of what does a consumer need to run locally versus connected.Your prediction of low margins may be true to a point---but that is the beauty of globalization .
These US companies who want to make only huge profit items will eventually wither from a thousand cuts as Taiwan/Chinese companies decide their happy to make 10 million netbooks with a net profit of 3 bucks each.If you need specialization , then you 're going to pay through the teeth ( GPS Navigation / E-Readers ) .
Those companies make a killing on you from both software and hardware .
Personally , i wont touch e-readers until they allow me to place them onto a general-computing device .
Same reason I 've never toughed DRM-Music.... its too expensive and too limiting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The netbook is only going to grow, so long as companies keep making more and more apps for linux, xor companies keep moving their applications onto the web.
There's only the balance then of what does a consumer need to run locally versus connected.Your prediction of low margins may be true to a point---but that is the beauty of globalization.
These US companies who want to make only huge profit items will eventually wither from a thousand cuts as Taiwan/Chinese companies decide their happy to make 10 million netbooks with a net profit of 3 bucks each.If you need specialization, then you're going to pay through the teeth (GPS Navigation / E-Readers).
Those companies make a killing on you from both software and hardware.
Personally, i wont touch e-readers until they allow me to place them onto a general-computing device.
Same reason I've never toughed DRM-Music.... its too expensive and too limiting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617688</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1262353320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i think this pdf touches on the topic:<br><a href="http://c4ss.org/content/888" title="c4ss.org">http://c4ss.org/content/888</a> [c4ss.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i think this pdf touches on the topic : http : //c4ss.org/content/888 [ c4ss.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i think this pdf touches on the topic:http://c4ss.org/content/888 [c4ss.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615706</id>
	<title>A classic trope ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262379000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Groups are out. Four-piece groups with guitars particularly are finished."<br>&mdash; Decca Recording Company executive Dick Rowe turning down The Beatles, 1962<br>"You set fire to it! Then what do you do, Walt? You inhale the smoke! You know, Walt, it seems you can stand in front of your own fireplace and have the same thing going for you!"<br>&mdash; Bob Newhart, to Sir Walter Raleigh, on the discovery of tobacco<br>* As late as 2005 Sir Alan ("Sralan") Sugar declared that the iPod would never take off.<br>* Daryl Zanuck predicted the failure of television because "people will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night".<br>* In 1977 the boss of Digital Equipment said that nobody would need a computer in their home - a view I remember sharing, though of course until the arrival of the internet, computers were almost largely used for word processing, calculating and very simple games.<br>* Back in 1883 Lord Kelvin said that X-rays would turn out to be a hoax, and in 1878 the chief engineer at the Post Office said we had no need for the telephone in Britain, as we still had plenty of messenger boys.<br>(all of the above are copied from a couple of articles)</p><p>Ever grow tired of people in print trying to appear wiser and know-it-all? There are dozens of ways a product can evolve and zap the market and then disappear off the map altogether. Why try to get all Nostradamus at the drop of a hat?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Groups are out .
Four-piece groups with guitars particularly are finished .
"    Decca Recording Company executive Dick Rowe turning down The Beatles , 1962 " You set fire to it !
Then what do you do , Walt ?
You inhale the smoke !
You know , Walt , it seems you can stand in front of your own fireplace and have the same thing going for you !
"    Bob Newhart , to Sir Walter Raleigh , on the discovery of tobacco * As late as 2005 Sir Alan ( " Sralan " ) Sugar declared that the iPod would never take off .
* Daryl Zanuck predicted the failure of television because " people will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night " .
* In 1977 the boss of Digital Equipment said that nobody would need a computer in their home - a view I remember sharing , though of course until the arrival of the internet , computers were almost largely used for word processing , calculating and very simple games .
* Back in 1883 Lord Kelvin said that X-rays would turn out to be a hoax , and in 1878 the chief engineer at the Post Office said we had no need for the telephone in Britain , as we still had plenty of messenger boys .
( all of the above are copied from a couple of articles ) Ever grow tired of people in print trying to appear wiser and know-it-all ?
There are dozens of ways a product can evolve and zap the market and then disappear off the map altogether .
Why try to get all Nostradamus at the drop of a hat ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Groups are out.
Four-piece groups with guitars particularly are finished.
"— Decca Recording Company executive Dick Rowe turning down The Beatles, 1962"You set fire to it!
Then what do you do, Walt?
You inhale the smoke!
You know, Walt, it seems you can stand in front of your own fireplace and have the same thing going for you!
"— Bob Newhart, to Sir Walter Raleigh, on the discovery of tobacco* As late as 2005 Sir Alan ("Sralan") Sugar declared that the iPod would never take off.
* Daryl Zanuck predicted the failure of television because "people will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night".
* In 1977 the boss of Digital Equipment said that nobody would need a computer in their home - a view I remember sharing, though of course until the arrival of the internet, computers were almost largely used for word processing, calculating and very simple games.
* Back in 1883 Lord Kelvin said that X-rays would turn out to be a hoax, and in 1878 the chief engineer at the Post Office said we had no need for the telephone in Britain, as we still had plenty of messenger boys.
(all of the above are copied from a couple of articles)Ever grow tired of people in print trying to appear wiser and know-it-all?
There are dozens of ways a product can evolve and zap the market and then disappear off the map altogether.
Why try to get all Nostradamus at the drop of a hat?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617386</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262351040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>that didn't way 3 pounds</p></div><p>Weigh two Gogh!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>that did n't way 3 poundsWeigh two Gogh !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that didn't way 3 poundsWeigh two Gogh!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616050</id>
	<title>Your post...where to start?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262338980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 3rd generation of Atom processor is about what it's always been about-- lower power. Processor is ~10\% faster clock/clock, but this time the graphics is integrated on the same silicon chip. AKA much lower power-- we're talking 12 hours on a 6cell battery instead of 5-6 with the GMA950 graphics chips that were on a 90nm process.</p><p>AMD does not have an Atom killer in the works. They would have announced it to keep shareholders happy.<br>The ARM chips are SLOW for a desktop environment. Sure, they can accelerate 1080p video (so can my GMA500 in my netbook), but if Gnome is running at 8fps (yes, I saw it) then the processor is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... not fast enough. The Atoms are much faster than ARM's offerings, and Windows 7 is faster and more resource friendly than Linux.</p><p>Windows 7 is the "netbook friendly" Windows version after Vista, so I'm not sure why you say Microsoft has not been netbook friendly. Just <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Seashell-1008HA-PU17-BK-10-1-Inch-Black-Netbook/dp/B002P3KMVM/ref=sr\_1\_7?ie=UTF8&amp;s=electronics&amp;qid=1262378488&amp;sr=8-7" title="amazon.com">don't get one with Windows 7 Starter.</a> [amazon.com]</p><p>I'm sorry but your post just sounds like the typical "rah-rah-Linux Microsoft Sucks" post without the facts to back it up, just ranting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 3rd generation of Atom processor is about what it 's always been about-- lower power .
Processor is ~ 10 \ % faster clock/clock , but this time the graphics is integrated on the same silicon chip .
AKA much lower power-- we 're talking 12 hours on a 6cell battery instead of 5-6 with the GMA950 graphics chips that were on a 90nm process.AMD does not have an Atom killer in the works .
They would have announced it to keep shareholders happy.The ARM chips are SLOW for a desktop environment .
Sure , they can accelerate 1080p video ( so can my GMA500 in my netbook ) , but if Gnome is running at 8fps ( yes , I saw it ) then the processor is ... not fast enough .
The Atoms are much faster than ARM 's offerings , and Windows 7 is faster and more resource friendly than Linux.Windows 7 is the " netbook friendly " Windows version after Vista , so I 'm not sure why you say Microsoft has not been netbook friendly .
Just do n't get one with Windows 7 Starter .
[ amazon.com ] I 'm sorry but your post just sounds like the typical " rah-rah-Linux Microsoft Sucks " post without the facts to back it up , just ranting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 3rd generation of Atom processor is about what it's always been about-- lower power.
Processor is ~10\% faster clock/clock, but this time the graphics is integrated on the same silicon chip.
AKA much lower power-- we're talking 12 hours on a 6cell battery instead of 5-6 with the GMA950 graphics chips that were on a 90nm process.AMD does not have an Atom killer in the works.
They would have announced it to keep shareholders happy.The ARM chips are SLOW for a desktop environment.
Sure, they can accelerate 1080p video (so can my GMA500 in my netbook), but if Gnome is running at 8fps (yes, I saw it) then the processor is ... not fast enough.
The Atoms are much faster than ARM's offerings, and Windows 7 is faster and more resource friendly than Linux.Windows 7 is the "netbook friendly" Windows version after Vista, so I'm not sure why you say Microsoft has not been netbook friendly.
Just don't get one with Windows 7 Starter.
[amazon.com]I'm sorry but your post just sounds like the typical "rah-rah-Linux Microsoft Sucks" post without the facts to back it up, just ranting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616186</id>
	<title>synopsis</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1262340360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So basically, the article says netbooks are going to fail because of:</p><p>* rising netbook costs<br>* smartphones increasing in functionality<br>* ARM preeminence on the horizon<br>* specialized devices (ie Kindle and kin) serving people's needs</p><p>Basically, what it boils down to, is "Netbooks are too expensive now due to Windows".</p><p>Frankly, I think the article is full of crap. The netbook isn't going anywhere; in fact, I think we'll see netbooks getting more features in the coming year, reducing their cost and/or increasing their diversity. Namely:</p><p>* That Pixel Qi or whatever screen which is viewable in direct sunlight we've been hearing about. Who needs a Kindle (for only $100 less) which is a crippled device, when you can get a full computer?<br>* "Convertible" displays (ie tablets), again challenging the Kindle<br>* Touchscreens</p><p>Granted, if ARM based devices can get into the market in the sub-$300 range and have all of those above features, I don't see why they wouldn't be able to "compete" with Intel based machines - x86 Windows and x86 apps included.</p><p>Personally, I've been waiting for better part of a decade for what is, essentially, a modern ARM tablet with a low-power display (loooong use) which is also similar to the NEC MobilePro 790 and/or 900. Might actually have a chance of that at some point. Surfing the internet from the top of a mountain after weeks of being there, via packet radio, would be so cool...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So basically , the article says netbooks are going to fail because of : * rising netbook costs * smartphones increasing in functionality * ARM preeminence on the horizon * specialized devices ( ie Kindle and kin ) serving people 's needsBasically , what it boils down to , is " Netbooks are too expensive now due to Windows " .Frankly , I think the article is full of crap .
The netbook is n't going anywhere ; in fact , I think we 'll see netbooks getting more features in the coming year , reducing their cost and/or increasing their diversity .
Namely : * That Pixel Qi or whatever screen which is viewable in direct sunlight we 've been hearing about .
Who needs a Kindle ( for only $ 100 less ) which is a crippled device , when you can get a full computer ?
* " Convertible " displays ( ie tablets ) , again challenging the Kindle * TouchscreensGranted , if ARM based devices can get into the market in the sub- $ 300 range and have all of those above features , I do n't see why they would n't be able to " compete " with Intel based machines - x86 Windows and x86 apps included.Personally , I 've been waiting for better part of a decade for what is , essentially , a modern ARM tablet with a low-power display ( loooong use ) which is also similar to the NEC MobilePro 790 and/or 900 .
Might actually have a chance of that at some point .
Surfing the internet from the top of a mountain after weeks of being there , via packet radio , would be so cool.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So basically, the article says netbooks are going to fail because of:* rising netbook costs* smartphones increasing in functionality* ARM preeminence on the horizon* specialized devices (ie Kindle and kin) serving people's needsBasically, what it boils down to, is "Netbooks are too expensive now due to Windows".Frankly, I think the article is full of crap.
The netbook isn't going anywhere; in fact, I think we'll see netbooks getting more features in the coming year, reducing their cost and/or increasing their diversity.
Namely:* That Pixel Qi or whatever screen which is viewable in direct sunlight we've been hearing about.
Who needs a Kindle (for only $100 less) which is a crippled device, when you can get a full computer?
* "Convertible" displays (ie tablets), again challenging the Kindle* TouchscreensGranted, if ARM based devices can get into the market in the sub-$300 range and have all of those above features, I don't see why they wouldn't be able to "compete" with Intel based machines - x86 Windows and x86 apps included.Personally, I've been waiting for better part of a decade for what is, essentially, a modern ARM tablet with a low-power display (loooong use) which is also similar to the NEC MobilePro 790 and/or 900.
Might actually have a chance of that at some point.
Surfing the internet from the top of a mountain after weeks of being there, via packet radio, would be so cool...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616382</id>
	<title>Re:What's important about a netbook</title>
	<author>johnkzin</author>
	<datestamp>1262342700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was supposed to be "well under $1000" not "well under $100"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-}</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was supposed to be " well under $ 1000 " not " well under $ 100 " : - }</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was supposed to be "well under $1000" not "well under $100" :-}</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615756</id>
	<title>Re:failure due to high cost, poor quality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262379480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it's ultimate success has more to do with price. $400 netbooks are doomed to get squeezed into irrelevance, but at $200, netbooks fill a niche for a flexible, low-powered, general-purpose (software loadable) platform. I am looking into buying one to use when we go on vacation (for airline check-ins, looking up restaurants, making hotel reservations, etc...) I know others that use them for media players, alarm clocks, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's ultimate success has more to do with price .
$ 400 netbooks are doomed to get squeezed into irrelevance , but at $ 200 , netbooks fill a niche for a flexible , low-powered , general-purpose ( software loadable ) platform .
I am looking into buying one to use when we go on vacation ( for airline check-ins , looking up restaurants , making hotel reservations , etc... ) I know others that use them for media players , alarm clocks , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's ultimate success has more to do with price.
$400 netbooks are doomed to get squeezed into irrelevance, but at $200, netbooks fill a niche for a flexible, low-powered, general-purpose (software loadable) platform.
I am looking into buying one to use when we go on vacation (for airline check-ins, looking up restaurants, making hotel reservations, etc...) I know others that use them for media players, alarm clocks, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620674</id>
	<title>Re:predicted convergence unlikely</title>
	<author>David Jao</author>
	<datestamp>1262426100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The predicted convergence is very unlikely for two reasons: keyboard and display.</p></div><p>
In North America, there's a third reason why convergence is unlikely: phones are very rarely sold unlocked, and manufacturers use every means at their disposal to tie smartphones to expensive long-term contracts.
</p><p>
There is no way a phone with a long term contract can compete on price with a netbook or even a laptop. Consumers these days are very price-sensitive and no longer fooled by contracts that back-load the true costs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The predicted convergence is very unlikely for two reasons : keyboard and display .
In North America , there 's a third reason why convergence is unlikely : phones are very rarely sold unlocked , and manufacturers use every means at their disposal to tie smartphones to expensive long-term contracts .
There is no way a phone with a long term contract can compete on price with a netbook or even a laptop .
Consumers these days are very price-sensitive and no longer fooled by contracts that back-load the true costs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The predicted convergence is very unlikely for two reasons: keyboard and display.
In North America, there's a third reason why convergence is unlikely: phones are very rarely sold unlocked, and manufacturers use every means at their disposal to tie smartphones to expensive long-term contracts.
There is no way a phone with a long term contract can compete on price with a netbook or even a laptop.
Consumers these days are very price-sensitive and no longer fooled by contracts that back-load the true costs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615562</id>
	<title>The return of the Bat-Belt</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262377500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Changing web habits and greater use of social media will mean consumers will be looking for gadgets that are tuned to specific purposes.</p><p>Yeah, sure. As a consumer I really want to load my belt with my phone, my music player, my pda, my pager, my tag reader, my gps, my ebook reader and whatnot. I don't mind having ten different battery-chargers in my living room. What I don't want is a 300$ netbook because it does not have a specific purpose.</p><p>Which reminds me: when will best buy sell a Facebook device, a Slashdot reader and a youtube player? Cause I still have three inches left on my belt to hook gadgets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Changing web habits and greater use of social media will mean consumers will be looking for gadgets that are tuned to specific purposes.Yeah , sure .
As a consumer I really want to load my belt with my phone , my music player , my pda , my pager , my tag reader , my gps , my ebook reader and whatnot .
I do n't mind having ten different battery-chargers in my living room .
What I do n't want is a 300 $ netbook because it does not have a specific purpose.Which reminds me : when will best buy sell a Facebook device , a Slashdot reader and a youtube player ?
Cause I still have three inches left on my belt to hook gadgets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Changing web habits and greater use of social media will mean consumers will be looking for gadgets that are tuned to specific purposes.Yeah, sure.
As a consumer I really want to load my belt with my phone, my music player, my pda, my pager, my tag reader, my gps, my ebook reader and whatnot.
I don't mind having ten different battery-chargers in my living room.
What I don't want is a 300$ netbook because it does not have a specific purpose.Which reminds me: when will best buy sell a Facebook device, a Slashdot reader and a youtube player?
Cause I still have three inches left on my belt to hook gadgets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615440</id>
	<title>Wintel</title>
	<author>Lord Byron II</author>
	<datestamp>1262376600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft and Intel have been very uninterested in netbooks since they don't have the same market share as full size laptops. That's why the third generation of Atom chips aren't really any faster than the first generation and why the version of Windows 7 that gets stuck on a netbook is so limited you can't even change the background.</p><p>But other companies, without a large amount of profit coming from fullsize laptops, will jump at the chance to increase their bottom line. Ubuntu and ARM for example, have nothing to lose by offering netbook products, since they don't have any real marketshare in the laptop market.</p><p>AMD has been suspiciously quiet the last couple of years. I'm waiting to see if they might come out with an "Atom-killer". And don't forget Via. They already have a competent netbook chip.</p><p>There's definitely a market demand for low cost netbooks, so Intel and Microsoft can continue ignore this segment and risk that their competitors will take it away, or they can get in the game themselves. I think we'll see a real change in the netbook market maybe not this year, but early in 2011 as more and more alternatives to Atom and Windows 7 become available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft and Intel have been very uninterested in netbooks since they do n't have the same market share as full size laptops .
That 's why the third generation of Atom chips are n't really any faster than the first generation and why the version of Windows 7 that gets stuck on a netbook is so limited you ca n't even change the background.But other companies , without a large amount of profit coming from fullsize laptops , will jump at the chance to increase their bottom line .
Ubuntu and ARM for example , have nothing to lose by offering netbook products , since they do n't have any real marketshare in the laptop market.AMD has been suspiciously quiet the last couple of years .
I 'm waiting to see if they might come out with an " Atom-killer " .
And do n't forget Via .
They already have a competent netbook chip.There 's definitely a market demand for low cost netbooks , so Intel and Microsoft can continue ignore this segment and risk that their competitors will take it away , or they can get in the game themselves .
I think we 'll see a real change in the netbook market maybe not this year , but early in 2011 as more and more alternatives to Atom and Windows 7 become available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft and Intel have been very uninterested in netbooks since they don't have the same market share as full size laptops.
That's why the third generation of Atom chips aren't really any faster than the first generation and why the version of Windows 7 that gets stuck on a netbook is so limited you can't even change the background.But other companies, without a large amount of profit coming from fullsize laptops, will jump at the chance to increase their bottom line.
Ubuntu and ARM for example, have nothing to lose by offering netbook products, since they don't have any real marketshare in the laptop market.AMD has been suspiciously quiet the last couple of years.
I'm waiting to see if they might come out with an "Atom-killer".
And don't forget Via.
They already have a competent netbook chip.There's definitely a market demand for low cost netbooks, so Intel and Microsoft can continue ignore this segment and risk that their competitors will take it away, or they can get in the game themselves.
I think we'll see a real change in the netbook market maybe not this year, but early in 2011 as more and more alternatives to Atom and Windows 7 become available.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615822</id>
	<title>Re:failure due to high cost, poor quality</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1262336880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find he GP is right about the screen size though. The biggest improvement I'd make to netbook is to move to a 1024x768 or better resolution screen.  I'd even give up a bit more processor power for it. The screen resolution is what I find really crippling about my netbook. If it had a better screen, I could probably even use it for software development, instead of limited browsing, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find he GP is right about the screen size though .
The biggest improvement I 'd make to netbook is to move to a 1024x768 or better resolution screen .
I 'd even give up a bit more processor power for it .
The screen resolution is what I find really crippling about my netbook .
If it had a better screen , I could probably even use it for software development , instead of limited browsing , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find he GP is right about the screen size though.
The biggest improvement I'd make to netbook is to move to a 1024x768 or better resolution screen.
I'd even give up a bit more processor power for it.
The screen resolution is what I find really crippling about my netbook.
If it had a better screen, I could probably even use it for software development, instead of limited browsing, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615868</id>
	<title>Re:Will the same happen to phones?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262337360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree.  Ian Drew is the vice president of marketing at ARM Ltd.  ARM sells chip technologies used in embedded devices and their competitors are Intel and AMD.  Of course ARM Ltd would love if everyone bought "specialized" devices powered by the ARM Ltd technology instead of Intel/AMD powered general use netbooks.  How he thinks a specific embedded device is less constrained than a netbook is beyond me.  I think it's cool to browse the web from my ARM Ltd powered 42in LCD TV but I'll bet my next years salary that I can do more on the internet with my $250 netbook than I can with that TV.  Think about ti though..  You will pay more for a web enabled DVD player, TV, and home stereo receiver, do you really need all three to be web enabled?  The additional cost of those with the web enabled features will probably cost as much as a netbook plugged into the TV that you can browse from plus provide about 100x more functionality.</p><p>Here is an interview he had back in Jan 2009<br><a href="http://www.computerpoweruser.com/editorial/article.asp?guid=&amp;searchtype=0&amp;article=articles/archive/c0901/67c01/67c01.asp&amp;articleid=52267&amp;WordList=&amp;bJumpTo=True" title="computerpoweruser.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.computerpoweruser.com/editorial/article.asp?guid=&amp;searchtype=0&amp;article=articles/archive/c0901/67c01/67c01.asp&amp;articleid=52267&amp;WordList=&amp;bJumpTo=True</a> [computerpoweruser.com]</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
Ian Drew is the vice president of marketing at ARM Ltd. ARM sells chip technologies used in embedded devices and their competitors are Intel and AMD .
Of course ARM Ltd would love if everyone bought " specialized " devices powered by the ARM Ltd technology instead of Intel/AMD powered general use netbooks .
How he thinks a specific embedded device is less constrained than a netbook is beyond me .
I think it 's cool to browse the web from my ARM Ltd powered 42in LCD TV but I 'll bet my next years salary that I can do more on the internet with my $ 250 netbook than I can with that TV .
Think about ti though.. You will pay more for a web enabled DVD player , TV , and home stereo receiver , do you really need all three to be web enabled ?
The additional cost of those with the web enabled features will probably cost as much as a netbook plugged into the TV that you can browse from plus provide about 100x more functionality.Here is an interview he had back in Jan 2009http : //www.computerpoweruser.com/editorial/article.asp ? guid = &amp;searchtype = 0&amp;article = articles/archive/c0901/67c01/67c01.asp&amp;articleid = 52267&amp;WordList = &amp;bJumpTo = True [ computerpoweruser.com ]  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
Ian Drew is the vice president of marketing at ARM Ltd.  ARM sells chip technologies used in embedded devices and their competitors are Intel and AMD.
Of course ARM Ltd would love if everyone bought "specialized" devices powered by the ARM Ltd technology instead of Intel/AMD powered general use netbooks.
How he thinks a specific embedded device is less constrained than a netbook is beyond me.
I think it's cool to browse the web from my ARM Ltd powered 42in LCD TV but I'll bet my next years salary that I can do more on the internet with my $250 netbook than I can with that TV.
Think about ti though..  You will pay more for a web enabled DVD player, TV, and home stereo receiver, do you really need all three to be web enabled?
The additional cost of those with the web enabled features will probably cost as much as a netbook plugged into the TV that you can browse from plus provide about 100x more functionality.Here is an interview he had back in Jan 2009http://www.computerpoweruser.com/editorial/article.asp?guid=&amp;searchtype=0&amp;article=articles/archive/c0901/67c01/67c01.asp&amp;articleid=52267&amp;WordList=&amp;bJumpTo=True [computerpoweruser.com]
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615416</id>
	<title>Not for a lot of us.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mine (Acer aspire) was less than $300, is small and light enough to take along every day, and<br>is powerful enough to support the work I do (sw development).  All three are important for me<br>to have my work with me all the time.  Any more expensive and I'd think twice about taking it<br>everywhere.  At $300 if I loose it or break it it's annoying but easy enough to replace.  Any<br>bigger or heavier and I'd think twice about throwing it in my backpack every day.  Any less power,<br>or no keyboard, and I couldn't do my work.  It's in the sweet spot for portable computing.  Sure<br>more battery time would be nice, but not at the expense of the keyboard, the power, or the<br>manageable size and low cost.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mine ( Acer aspire ) was less than $ 300 , is small and light enough to take along every day , andis powerful enough to support the work I do ( sw development ) .
All three are important for meto have my work with me all the time .
Any more expensive and I 'd think twice about taking iteverywhere .
At $ 300 if I loose it or break it it 's annoying but easy enough to replace .
Anybigger or heavier and I 'd think twice about throwing it in my backpack every day .
Any less power,or no keyboard , and I could n't do my work .
It 's in the sweet spot for portable computing .
Suremore battery time would be nice , but not at the expense of the keyboard , the power , or themanageable size and low cost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mine (Acer aspire) was less than $300, is small and light enough to take along every day, andis powerful enough to support the work I do (sw development).
All three are important for meto have my work with me all the time.
Any more expensive and I'd think twice about taking iteverywhere.
At $300 if I loose it or break it it's annoying but easy enough to replace.
Anybigger or heavier and I'd think twice about throwing it in my backpack every day.
Any less power,or no keyboard, and I couldn't do my work.
It's in the sweet spot for portable computing.
Suremore battery time would be nice, but not at the expense of the keyboard, the power, or themanageable size and low cost.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615576</id>
	<title>Marekting will kill the netbook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262377560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As they demand more and more laptop features ( and higher costs )..  as eventually they will become laptops and the market will vanish.  The people will still want them, but they wont exist. ( barely do now )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As they demand more and more laptop features ( and higher costs ) .. as eventually they will become laptops and the market will vanish .
The people will still want them , but they wont exist .
( barely do now )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As they demand more and more laptop features ( and higher costs )..  as eventually they will become laptops and the market will vanish.
The people will still want them, but they wont exist.
( barely do now )</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30637774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30622530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30631286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616870
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618590
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620520
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30621288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30629028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30623422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617870
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615694
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_1817256_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620744
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616026
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617538
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620674
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615724
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615700
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617750
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618704
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615500
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615754
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616170
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618902
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616452
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616154
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616242
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617688
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30623422
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620180
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30629028
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620612
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618776
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617386
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617870
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615868
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615682
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616666
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615818
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617590
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619306
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615466
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30620360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615882
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615694
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615558
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30622530
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615440
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616050
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616996
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617700
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30637774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615884
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616648
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30631286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30617184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616226
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618590
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616290
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615562
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30616104
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615740
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_1817256.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30615604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30618238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30619314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_1817256.30621288
</commentlist>
</conversation>
