<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_01_2247245</id>
	<title>Apple Fails To Deliver On Windows 7 Boot Camp Promise</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1262344920000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>SkydiverFL writes <i>"For those fans of Apple's Boot Camp package, it looks like you <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579\_3-10423148-37.html">might be waiting on the next 'end of year'</a> to use Windows 7 on your shiny silver boxes.  Back in October of this year, Apple published a rather short, but affirmative promise stating quite simply that, 'Apple will support Microsoft Windows 7 (Home Premium, Professional, and Ultimate) with Boot Camp in Mac OS X Snow Leopard <a href="http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3920">before the end of the year</a>. This support will require a software update to Boot Camp.'  The support page has no updates regarding the new version.  Maybe they're waiting for iSlate?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>SkydiverFL writes " For those fans of Apple 's Boot Camp package , it looks like you might be waiting on the next 'end of year ' to use Windows 7 on your shiny silver boxes .
Back in October of this year , Apple published a rather short , but affirmative promise stating quite simply that , 'Apple will support Microsoft Windows 7 ( Home Premium , Professional , and Ultimate ) with Boot Camp in Mac OS X Snow Leopard before the end of the year .
This support will require a software update to Boot Camp .
' The support page has no updates regarding the new version .
Maybe they 're waiting for iSlate ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SkydiverFL writes "For those fans of Apple's Boot Camp package, it looks like you might be waiting on the next 'end of year' to use Windows 7 on your shiny silver boxes.
Back in October of this year, Apple published a rather short, but affirmative promise stating quite simply that, 'Apple will support Microsoft Windows 7 (Home Premium, Professional, and Ultimate) with Boot Camp in Mac OS X Snow Leopard before the end of the year.
This support will require a software update to Boot Camp.
'  The support page has no updates regarding the new version.
Maybe they're waiting for iSlate?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617768</id>
	<title>No issues here</title>
	<author>theheff</author>
	<datestamp>1262353620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've really had no problems on the latest model unibody 15" MBP. I've been running the Windows 7 x64 RTM since it was released. I think the best features added from the actual bootcamp installation are the keyboard/trackpad functions, HFS+ drivers, and backlit keyboard. Drivers aren't really an issue...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've really had no problems on the latest model unibody 15 " MBP .
I 've been running the Windows 7 x64 RTM since it was released .
I think the best features added from the actual bootcamp installation are the keyboard/trackpad functions , HFS + drivers , and backlit keyboard .
Drivers are n't really an issue.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've really had no problems on the latest model unibody 15" MBP.
I've been running the Windows 7 x64 RTM since it was released.
I think the best features added from the actual bootcamp installation are the keyboard/trackpad functions, HFS+ drivers, and backlit keyboard.
Drivers aren't really an issue...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619136</id>
	<title>Re:Apple Specific Drivers</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1262363340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Ubuntu on a Macbook. The power management (battery life, suspend, hibernate) is much better on Mac OS, and there are a few drivers that need to be installed, but otherwise it works just fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Ubuntu on a Macbook .
The power management ( battery life , suspend , hibernate ) is much better on Mac OS , and there are a few drivers that need to be installed , but otherwise it works just fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Ubuntu on a Macbook.
The power management (battery life, suspend, hibernate) is much better on Mac OS, and there are a few drivers that need to be installed, but otherwise it works just fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619280</id>
	<title>Re:Why do you eschew choice?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262364840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...it seems reasonable to pay a little more for more choice.</p></div><p>This might be the most ironic statement in this whole discussion.  Non-Apple PCs can't run OS-X because Apple FUCKING MAKES IT A VIOLATION OF THE EULA to do so.  Where's you're "choice" now?</p><p>You're singing the praises of the very company that wants to control everything you can do with "your" purchases.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...it seems reasonable to pay a little more for more choice.This might be the most ironic statement in this whole discussion .
Non-Apple PCs ca n't run OS-X because Apple FUCKING MAKES IT A VIOLATION OF THE EULA to do so .
Where 's you 're " choice " now ? You 're singing the praises of the very company that wants to control everything you can do with " your " purchases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...it seems reasonable to pay a little more for more choice.This might be the most ironic statement in this whole discussion.
Non-Apple PCs can't run OS-X because Apple FUCKING MAKES IT A VIOLATION OF THE EULA to do so.
Where's you're "choice" now?You're singing the praises of the very company that wants to control everything you can do with "your" purchases.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618260</id>
	<title>examples please</title>
	<author>newdsfornerds</author>
	<datestamp>1262356320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not trolling, honestly. <br>
Can you name some of these apps?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not trolling , honestly .
Can you name some of these apps ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not trolling, honestly.
Can you name some of these apps?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618798</id>
	<title>Re:Bootcamp a gimmick</title>
	<author>jo\_ham</author>
	<datestamp>1262359920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Games and good hardware.</p><p>I know a guy that has an office full of Aluminium iMacs that only run Windows - he likes the design, especially the space saving and the quality of the screens. It was the best all-in-one machine he could find.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Games and good hardware.I know a guy that has an office full of Aluminium iMacs that only run Windows - he likes the design , especially the space saving and the quality of the screens .
It was the best all-in-one machine he could find .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games and good hardware.I know a guy that has an office full of Aluminium iMacs that only run Windows - he likes the design, especially the space saving and the quality of the screens.
It was the best all-in-one machine he could find.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618774</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1262359740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dunno. Some of MY work apps are mandated to run in a VM.</p><p>OTOH, the only real dog I've seen on the personal side for VirtualBox is iTunes [snicker].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dunno .
Some of MY work apps are mandated to run in a VM.OTOH , the only real dog I 've seen on the personal side for VirtualBox is iTunes [ snicker ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dunno.
Some of MY work apps are mandated to run in a VM.OTOH, the only real dog I've seen on the personal side for VirtualBox is iTunes [snicker].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618974</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262361600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is not true.  I also installed Windows 7 off of TechNet at launch, but a lot of stuff is broken.

You will not get external audio jack support with Windows 7 OEM drivers on iMac 2009 machines.

You will also not get internal microphone or mixer support with Windows 7 OEM drivers on iMac 2009 machines.

If you intend on using any Voice over IP applications, Cisco IP Communicator, Ventrilo, Microsoft OCS - install Vista.

And, updated sound drivers will not fix your problem.  The Intel chipset drivers that ship native to boot camp are what are needed to map the mixer.

Windows 7 driver support on iMac's are a sorry state of affairs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not true .
I also installed Windows 7 off of TechNet at launch , but a lot of stuff is broken .
You will not get external audio jack support with Windows 7 OEM drivers on iMac 2009 machines .
You will also not get internal microphone or mixer support with Windows 7 OEM drivers on iMac 2009 machines .
If you intend on using any Voice over IP applications , Cisco IP Communicator , Ventrilo , Microsoft OCS - install Vista .
And , updated sound drivers will not fix your problem .
The Intel chipset drivers that ship native to boot camp are what are needed to map the mixer .
Windows 7 driver support on iMac 's are a sorry state of affairs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not true.
I also installed Windows 7 off of TechNet at launch, but a lot of stuff is broken.
You will not get external audio jack support with Windows 7 OEM drivers on iMac 2009 machines.
You will also not get internal microphone or mixer support with Windows 7 OEM drivers on iMac 2009 machines.
If you intend on using any Voice over IP applications, Cisco IP Communicator, Ventrilo, Microsoft OCS - install Vista.
And, updated sound drivers will not fix your problem.
The Intel chipset drivers that ship native to boot camp are what are needed to map the mixer.
Windows 7 driver support on iMac's are a sorry state of affairs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621810</id>
	<title>Re:Virtualbox</title>
	<author>svirre</author>
	<datestamp>1262443440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well yes and no.</p><p>The current VMware fusion actually supports Dx9 and permitted me to start up team fortress 2, however performance is sufficiently poor that for practical purposes you would need to dual boot to play.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well yes and no.The current VMware fusion actually supports Dx9 and permitted me to start up team fortress 2 , however performance is sufficiently poor that for practical purposes you would need to dual boot to play .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well yes and no.The current VMware fusion actually supports Dx9 and permitted me to start up team fortress 2, however performance is sufficiently poor that for practical purposes you would need to dual boot to play.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30627622</id>
	<title>Re:Wait,</title>
	<author>anethema</author>
	<datestamp>1262436960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree with the other child post. You can see your mac drive just fine in windows. The boot camp 3.0 drivers included on the snow leopard dvd mostly work fine (though some good updates are out there from the manufacturers such as realtek and nvidia)<br><br>If you do not have a snow leopard dvd, torrent and enjoy!<br><br>http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5054638/Bootcamp\_Driver\_3.0\_for\_Windows\_32bit\_\_amp\_\_64bit\_\%28from\_Snow\_Leopard</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with the other child post .
You can see your mac drive just fine in windows .
The boot camp 3.0 drivers included on the snow leopard dvd mostly work fine ( though some good updates are out there from the manufacturers such as realtek and nvidia ) If you do not have a snow leopard dvd , torrent and enjoy ! http : //thepiratebay.org/torrent/5054638/Bootcamp \ _Driver \ _3.0 \ _for \ _Windows \ _32bit \ _ \ _amp \ _ \ _64bit \ _ \ % 28from \ _Snow \ _Leopard</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with the other child post.
You can see your mac drive just fine in windows.
The boot camp 3.0 drivers included on the snow leopard dvd mostly work fine (though some good updates are out there from the manufacturers such as realtek and nvidia)If you do not have a snow leopard dvd, torrent and enjoy!http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5054638/Bootcamp\_Driver\_3.0\_for\_Windows\_32bit\_\_amp\_\_64bit\_\%28from\_Snow\_Leopard</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621220</id>
	<title>As with all Macs</title>
	<author>bytesex</author>
	<datestamp>1262434920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use boot camp only as a repartioner.  Use rEFIt for your bootstrapping needs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use boot camp only as a repartioner .
Use rEFIt for your bootstrapping needs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use boot camp only as a repartioner.
Use rEFIt for your bootstrapping needs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619406</id>
	<title>re:  There are still bugs ....</title>
	<author>King\_TJ</author>
	<datestamp>1262366220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I ran across a nasty bug when I first put Windows 7 on a drive in my Mac Pro.</p><p>My system has 4 physical hard drives in it.  The first was labeled "OS X Boot" and the 2nd. and 3rd. had labels of "Data 1" and "Data 2".  I installed Windows 7 on the 4th. drive.  All went well, except when booted into Windows 7, it displayed the OS X drives out of order.  (With the latest version of Boot Camp drivers on the Snow Leopard DVD, they provide "read only" support of the OS X HFS+ volumes in Windows.)  It was assigning my "Data 1" drive as drive G" while "Data 2" was drive F:, and "OS X Boot" was given letter H:.</p><p>I figured "No big deal. I know how to fix it when Windows does this stuff<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....", and went into Computer Management and Disk Management under Administrative Tools, and told it to reassign the drive letters in the order I wanted them.  It did, as requested, and all seemed to be well.</p><p>EXCEPT, on reboot into OS X, I discovered my OS X drives were rendered unbootable/unusable!   Windows 7 could see them just fine - but the Mac didn't like them natively anymore!  Worse yet, I tried all sorts of disk repair utilities on them and the usual result was being shown that the drives were of an "unrecognized partition type" and options to repair them were "greyed out"!  One program, Drive Genius, actually let me verify and repair the volumes - but after running through everything, insisted the drives were "ok" and there was nothing to repair!</p><p>Apparently, the Disk Management in Windows actually rewrites something in the partition table when it reassigns drive letters (not just a registry update), and whatever it does changes things JUST enough to screw up OS X from using the HFS+ volumes normally.   Apple really needs to update their drivers so they prevent people from being able to write to the drives from Windows' disk management tool, since this is the case.  "Read only HFS+ support" should mean just that!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I ran across a nasty bug when I first put Windows 7 on a drive in my Mac Pro.My system has 4 physical hard drives in it .
The first was labeled " OS X Boot " and the 2nd .
and 3rd .
had labels of " Data 1 " and " Data 2 " .
I installed Windows 7 on the 4th .
drive. All went well , except when booted into Windows 7 , it displayed the OS X drives out of order .
( With the latest version of Boot Camp drivers on the Snow Leopard DVD , they provide " read only " support of the OS X HFS + volumes in Windows .
) It was assigning my " Data 1 " drive as drive G " while " Data 2 " was drive F : , and " OS X Boot " was given letter H : .I figured " No big deal .
I know how to fix it when Windows does this stuff .... " , and went into Computer Management and Disk Management under Administrative Tools , and told it to reassign the drive letters in the order I wanted them .
It did , as requested , and all seemed to be well.EXCEPT , on reboot into OS X , I discovered my OS X drives were rendered unbootable/unusable !
Windows 7 could see them just fine - but the Mac did n't like them natively anymore !
Worse yet , I tried all sorts of disk repair utilities on them and the usual result was being shown that the drives were of an " unrecognized partition type " and options to repair them were " greyed out " !
One program , Drive Genius , actually let me verify and repair the volumes - but after running through everything , insisted the drives were " ok " and there was nothing to repair ! Apparently , the Disk Management in Windows actually rewrites something in the partition table when it reassigns drive letters ( not just a registry update ) , and whatever it does changes things JUST enough to screw up OS X from using the HFS + volumes normally .
Apple really needs to update their drivers so they prevent people from being able to write to the drives from Windows ' disk management tool , since this is the case .
" Read only HFS + support " should mean just that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I ran across a nasty bug when I first put Windows 7 on a drive in my Mac Pro.My system has 4 physical hard drives in it.
The first was labeled "OS X Boot" and the 2nd.
and 3rd.
had labels of "Data 1" and "Data 2".
I installed Windows 7 on the 4th.
drive.  All went well, except when booted into Windows 7, it displayed the OS X drives out of order.
(With the latest version of Boot Camp drivers on the Snow Leopard DVD, they provide "read only" support of the OS X HFS+ volumes in Windows.
)  It was assigning my "Data 1" drive as drive G" while "Data 2" was drive F:, and "OS X Boot" was given letter H:.I figured "No big deal.
I know how to fix it when Windows does this stuff ....", and went into Computer Management and Disk Management under Administrative Tools, and told it to reassign the drive letters in the order I wanted them.
It did, as requested, and all seemed to be well.EXCEPT, on reboot into OS X, I discovered my OS X drives were rendered unbootable/unusable!
Windows 7 could see them just fine - but the Mac didn't like them natively anymore!
Worse yet, I tried all sorts of disk repair utilities on them and the usual result was being shown that the drives were of an "unrecognized partition type" and options to repair them were "greyed out"!
One program, Drive Genius, actually let me verify and repair the volumes - but after running through everything, insisted the drives were "ok" and there was nothing to repair!Apparently, the Disk Management in Windows actually rewrites something in the partition table when it reassigns drive letters (not just a registry update), and whatever it does changes things JUST enough to screw up OS X from using the HFS+ volumes normally.
Apple really needs to update their drivers so they prevent people from being able to write to the drives from Windows' disk management tool, since this is the case.
"Read only HFS+ support" should mean just that!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617878</id>
	<title>Re:Why do you eschew choice?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262354280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agree.  I'm thinking of getting a Macbook Pro, and it's tempting just to run it Windows 7 only.  OS X really doesn't have any advantages over Win 7 that I can think of - especially since my friends who own Mac's are always trying to find scripts and programs to download to get OS X to have features that Windows has had for forever (hibernate, keyboard shortcut to lock the screen, things like that).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agree .
I 'm thinking of getting a Macbook Pro , and it 's tempting just to run it Windows 7 only .
OS X really does n't have any advantages over Win 7 that I can think of - especially since my friends who own Mac 's are always trying to find scripts and programs to download to get OS X to have features that Windows has had for forever ( hibernate , keyboard shortcut to lock the screen , things like that ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agree.
I'm thinking of getting a Macbook Pro, and it's tempting just to run it Windows 7 only.
OS X really doesn't have any advantages over Win 7 that I can think of - especially since my friends who own Mac's are always trying to find scripts and programs to download to get OS X to have features that Windows has had for forever (hibernate, keyboard shortcut to lock the screen, things like that).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617078</id>
	<title>That's funny...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262348760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My macbook aluminum (5.1) has never had any problem with boot camping windows 7.</p><p>Has anyone had driver issues with their windows 7 bootcamp?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My macbook aluminum ( 5.1 ) has never had any problem with boot camping windows 7.Has anyone had driver issues with their windows 7 bootcamp ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My macbook aluminum (5.1) has never had any problem with boot camping windows 7.Has anyone had driver issues with their windows 7 bootcamp?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617100</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262348940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because some people have applications that need Windows to run for work, school, home, etc. that don't run nicely in VirtualBox.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because some people have applications that need Windows to run for work , school , home , etc .
that do n't run nicely in VirtualBox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because some people have applications that need Windows to run for work, school, home, etc.
that don't run nicely in VirtualBox.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618736</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>Z\_A\_Commando</author>
	<datestamp>1262359620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a friend with a 2008 MacBook Pro that absolutely could <em>not</em>, for whatever reason, get Windows 7 to run correctly on Bootcamp.  He would start it up and be able to get to the login screen, but his MBP would report the keyboard and touchpad as something non-generic and require a driver that doesn't yet exist for Window 7.  He could force-install a generic driver but the exact same thing would happen the next time Windows restarted because it detects a less than ideal driver and replaces it.</p><p>Last I checked he was running 7 inside VMware instead, but he'd rather run it without a host OS under Bootcamp.  As has been said lower here, it's not about the ability to run Windows 7 on Bootcamp, it's Apple's support of it.  What's disappointing is they've had a lot longer than the GA of Windows 7 to put together this "update" and still haven't done it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a friend with a 2008 MacBook Pro that absolutely could not , for whatever reason , get Windows 7 to run correctly on Bootcamp .
He would start it up and be able to get to the login screen , but his MBP would report the keyboard and touchpad as something non-generic and require a driver that does n't yet exist for Window 7 .
He could force-install a generic driver but the exact same thing would happen the next time Windows restarted because it detects a less than ideal driver and replaces it.Last I checked he was running 7 inside VMware instead , but he 'd rather run it without a host OS under Bootcamp .
As has been said lower here , it 's not about the ability to run Windows 7 on Bootcamp , it 's Apple 's support of it .
What 's disappointing is they 've had a lot longer than the GA of Windows 7 to put together this " update " and still have n't done it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a friend with a 2008 MacBook Pro that absolutely could not, for whatever reason, get Windows 7 to run correctly on Bootcamp.
He would start it up and be able to get to the login screen, but his MBP would report the keyboard and touchpad as something non-generic and require a driver that doesn't yet exist for Window 7.
He could force-install a generic driver but the exact same thing would happen the next time Windows restarted because it detects a less than ideal driver and replaces it.Last I checked he was running 7 inside VMware instead, but he'd rather run it without a host OS under Bootcamp.
As has been said lower here, it's not about the ability to run Windows 7 on Bootcamp, it's Apple's support of it.
What's disappointing is they've had a lot longer than the GA of Windows 7 to put together this "update" and still haven't done it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617068</id>
	<title>Virtualbox</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262348700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who cares about dual booting when you can run win 7 in virtualbox?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares about dual booting when you can run win 7 in virtualbox ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares about dual booting when you can run win 7 in virtualbox?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617508</id>
	<title>uhhh...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262352000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe they're waiting for iSlate?</p></div><p>iGuess...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they 're waiting for iSlate ? iGuess.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they're waiting for iSlate?iGuess...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619152</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>.tekrox</author>
	<datestamp>1262363520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The X64 Drivers work nicely too, and whilst it takes an extra step on some machines - you CAN install x64 Windows onto any Intel Mac with 64bit EFI<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>The X64 Drivers work nicely too , and whilst it takes an extra step on some machines - you CAN install x64 Windows onto any Intel Mac with 64bit EFI : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The X64 Drivers work nicely too, and whilst it takes an extra step on some machines - you CAN install x64 Windows onto any Intel Mac with 64bit EFI :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621206</id>
	<title>Re: There are still bugs ....</title>
	<author>jhdsl</author>
	<datestamp>1262434680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Boot from your install-dvd and run disk repair from there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Boot from your install-dvd and run disk repair from there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Boot from your install-dvd and run disk repair from there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618884</id>
	<title>Re:OSX runs windows, Pystar runs OSX.</title>
	<author>jo\_ham</author>
	<datestamp>1262360700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, yes you are missing a huge amount.</p><p>Best not to worry about it though - doesn't seem like you'd understand the issue anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , yes you are missing a huge amount.Best not to worry about it though - does n't seem like you 'd understand the issue anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, yes you are missing a huge amount.Best not to worry about it though - doesn't seem like you'd understand the issue anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618224</id>
	<title>Re:Umm...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262356080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, try finding a Mac user who ever looked behind the shiny surface of his protective retard padded system enough, to even remotely understand what that article means.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;))</p><p>Oh boy... prepare the fanboi pink dabber bombardement storm... ^^ *prepares heavy vulkan gatling gun*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , try finding a Mac user who ever looked behind the shiny surface of his protective retard padded system enough , to even remotely understand what that article means .
; ) ) Oh boy... prepare the fanboi pink dabber bombardement storm... ^ ^ * prepares heavy vulkan gatling gun *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, try finding a Mac user who ever looked behind the shiny surface of his protective retard padded system enough, to even remotely understand what that article means.
;))Oh boy... prepare the fanboi pink dabber bombardement storm... ^^ *prepares heavy vulkan gatling gun*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617784</id>
	<title>Wait,</title>
	<author>Movi</author>
	<datestamp>1262353740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, the version i am running from Snow Leopard, that says "compatible with Windows 7" right there on the setup screen is actually NOT compatible with windows 7.</p><p>FTFA:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>You cannot run your Mac applications simultaneously</p></div><p>No one notified me of this! Ive been running it like that since I installed it!</p><p><div class="quote"><p>You cannot safely resize the Mac or Windows partitions</p></div><p>Got me again! Next time i'll try it, i'll make sure to do it as unsafely as i can.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>You cannot easily transfer files between the two partitions (without third-party support)</p></div><p>I'll stop using the hfs driver in boot camp right away (once i learn to disable it. Damn apple making stuff just work).</p><p>Seriously, anyone reading CNet for legitimate stories should have his head checked.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , the version i am running from Snow Leopard , that says " compatible with Windows 7 " right there on the setup screen is actually NOT compatible with windows 7.FTFA : You can not run your Mac applications simultaneouslyNo one notified me of this !
Ive been running it like that since I installed it ! You can not safely resize the Mac or Windows partitionsGot me again !
Next time i 'll try it , i 'll make sure to do it as unsafely as i can.You can not easily transfer files between the two partitions ( without third-party support ) I 'll stop using the hfs driver in boot camp right away ( once i learn to disable it .
Damn apple making stuff just work ) .Seriously , anyone reading CNet for legitimate stories should have his head checked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, the version i am running from Snow Leopard, that says "compatible with Windows 7" right there on the setup screen is actually NOT compatible with windows 7.FTFA:You cannot run your Mac applications simultaneouslyNo one notified me of this!
Ive been running it like that since I installed it!You cannot safely resize the Mac or Windows partitionsGot me again!
Next time i'll try it, i'll make sure to do it as unsafely as i can.You cannot easily transfer files between the two partitions (without third-party support)I'll stop using the hfs driver in boot camp right away (once i learn to disable it.
Damn apple making stuff just work).Seriously, anyone reading CNet for legitimate stories should have his head checked.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617226</id>
	<title>Lost a little of my soul, but no other issues</title>
	<author>RunzWithScissors</author>
	<datestamp>1262349780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oddly, Windows 7 works just fine on my MacBook Pro 15".
<br> <br>
There was a Firmware update about 2 weeks ago, which may have been what we were waiting for; but I had no problems with it when I installed it today.
<br> <br>
-Runz</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oddly , Windows 7 works just fine on my MacBook Pro 15 " .
There was a Firmware update about 2 weeks ago , which may have been what we were waiting for ; but I had no problems with it when I installed it today .
-Runz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oddly, Windows 7 works just fine on my MacBook Pro 15".
There was a Firmware update about 2 weeks ago, which may have been what we were waiting for; but I had no problems with it when I installed it today.
-Runz</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617952</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1262354700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There is no need to wait.  I installed Windows 7 bootcamp on the day it was released on Technet, and it worked fine with the Vista drivers.</p></div><p>This is what I would assume since they are not using unique hardware anymore.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no need to wait .
I installed Windows 7 bootcamp on the day it was released on Technet , and it worked fine with the Vista drivers.This is what I would assume since they are not using unique hardware anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no need to wait.
I installed Windows 7 bootcamp on the day it was released on Technet, and it worked fine with the Vista drivers.This is what I would assume since they are not using unique hardware anymore.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194</id>
	<title>Why do you eschew choice?</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1262349540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you buy a Mac Laptop, you can run Windows, Linux or OS X, all fully supported.</p><p>If you buy a Windows laptop, you can't officially run OS X - and of course it comes pre-loaded with Windows, not OS X.</p><p>Considering you also get better quality hardware, it seems reasonable to pay a little more for more choice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you buy a Mac Laptop , you can run Windows , Linux or OS X , all fully supported.If you buy a Windows laptop , you ca n't officially run OS X - and of course it comes pre-loaded with Windows , not OS X.Considering you also get better quality hardware , it seems reasonable to pay a little more for more choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you buy a Mac Laptop, you can run Windows, Linux or OS X, all fully supported.If you buy a Windows laptop, you can't officially run OS X - and of course it comes pre-loaded with Windows, not OS X.Considering you also get better quality hardware, it seems reasonable to pay a little more for more choice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621734</id>
	<title>Article is likely wrong. Win 7 now supported.</title>
	<author>mbkennel</author>
	<datestamp>1262442660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know it's just "anecdotal evidence", but here goes.

I purchased a iMac in mid December along with Windows 7.  I used Boot Camp, and it had an explicit option for "Windows 7"

My conclusion: TFA is wrong, and Apple delivered Win 7 support on time as promised.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it 's just " anecdotal evidence " , but here goes .
I purchased a iMac in mid December along with Windows 7 .
I used Boot Camp , and it had an explicit option for " Windows 7 " My conclusion : TFA is wrong , and Apple delivered Win 7 support on time as promised .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it's just "anecdotal evidence", but here goes.
I purchased a iMac in mid December along with Windows 7.
I used Boot Camp, and it had an explicit option for "Windows 7"

My conclusion: TFA is wrong, and Apple delivered Win 7 support on time as promised.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30622106</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>Ironsides</author>
	<datestamp>1262446440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey, a question for you on performance.  How well does Win 7 run in VMware?  Is it possible to play DX games that way?  I'm panning on getting a Powerbook in two months and dualbooting Win7 on it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , a question for you on performance .
How well does Win 7 run in VMware ?
Is it possible to play DX games that way ?
I 'm panning on getting a Powerbook in two months and dualbooting Win7 on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, a question for you on performance.
How well does Win 7 run in VMware?
Is it possible to play DX games that way?
I'm panning on getting a Powerbook in two months and dualbooting Win7 on it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617432</id>
	<title>It works fine for me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262351460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been running Win7 64-bit Enterprise on my work Macbook 2,1 since August or September.  Had to fiddle with it since this machine isn't supported for 64-bit environments, but it worked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been running Win7 64-bit Enterprise on my work Macbook 2,1 since August or September .
Had to fiddle with it since this machine is n't supported for 64-bit environments , but it worked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been running Win7 64-bit Enterprise on my work Macbook 2,1 since August or September.
Had to fiddle with it since this machine isn't supported for 64-bit environments, but it worked.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621980</id>
	<title>Re:Its Very Doable now</title>
	<author>Lemmingue</author>
	<datestamp>1262445180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's funny how been slashdotted causes opposite effects in sites and torrent links. I guess I would never be able to get a decent download speed for these drivers without a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. link...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's funny how been slashdotted causes opposite effects in sites and torrent links .
I guess I would never be able to get a decent download speed for these drivers without a / .
link.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's funny how been slashdotted causes opposite effects in sites and torrent links.
I guess I would never be able to get a decent download speed for these drivers without a /.
link...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296</id>
	<title>Apple Specific Drivers</title>
	<author>WarpedCore</author>
	<datestamp>1262350260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>From what I heard, OS X uses certain low level functions that control processor speed/voltage within the OS itself versus what conventionally would be done through a BIOS on a normal PC. Apple uses EFI... I know that.

Just reading about some of the "dangers" if using a Mac to run Linux... main reason being, you have a likeliness of damaging the CPU if all you run are intensive tasks under Linux. Apple wrote drivers that deal with this stuff under Windows.

All in all, Vista drivers will work fine... but I'm just picky about "official bootcamp support" even if it is a gimmick. Apple wouldn't be putting an ounce of elbow grease into it unless there was something important they were writing into it to ensure a smooth experience.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I heard , OS X uses certain low level functions that control processor speed/voltage within the OS itself versus what conventionally would be done through a BIOS on a normal PC .
Apple uses EFI... I know that .
Just reading about some of the " dangers " if using a Mac to run Linux... main reason being , you have a likeliness of damaging the CPU if all you run are intensive tasks under Linux .
Apple wrote drivers that deal with this stuff under Windows .
All in all , Vista drivers will work fine... but I 'm just picky about " official bootcamp support " even if it is a gimmick .
Apple would n't be putting an ounce of elbow grease into it unless there was something important they were writing into it to ensure a smooth experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I heard, OS X uses certain low level functions that control processor speed/voltage within the OS itself versus what conventionally would be done through a BIOS on a normal PC.
Apple uses EFI... I know that.
Just reading about some of the "dangers" if using a Mac to run Linux... main reason being, you have a likeliness of damaging the CPU if all you run are intensive tasks under Linux.
Apple wrote drivers that deal with this stuff under Windows.
All in all, Vista drivers will work fine... but I'm just picky about "official bootcamp support" even if it is a gimmick.
Apple wouldn't be putting an ounce of elbow grease into it unless there was something important they were writing into it to ensure a smooth experience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617086</id>
	<title>Umm...</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1262348820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Um, I was under the impression that it was trivial to install Windows 7 on a Mac even without official boot camp support (per <a href="http://www.simplehelp.net/2009/01/15/using-boot-camp-to-install-windows-7-on-your-mac-the-complete-walkthrough/" title="simplehelp.net">http://www.simplehelp.net/2009/01/15/using-boot-camp-to-install-windows-7-on-your-mac-the-complete-walkthrough/</a> [simplehelp.net]) whats the difference between the tutorial and what you would do normally?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , I was under the impression that it was trivial to install Windows 7 on a Mac even without official boot camp support ( per http : //www.simplehelp.net/2009/01/15/using-boot-camp-to-install-windows-7-on-your-mac-the-complete-walkthrough/ [ simplehelp.net ] ) whats the difference between the tutorial and what you would do normally ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, I was under the impression that it was trivial to install Windows 7 on a Mac even without official boot camp support (per http://www.simplehelp.net/2009/01/15/using-boot-camp-to-install-windows-7-on-your-mac-the-complete-walkthrough/ [simplehelp.net]) whats the difference between the tutorial and what you would do normally?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617290</id>
	<title>Bootcamp and windows 7 working for me.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262350260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm confused. I have windows 7 installed in my macbook pro using bootcamp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm confused .
I have windows 7 installed in my macbook pro using bootcamp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm confused.
I have windows 7 installed in my macbook pro using bootcamp.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617754</id>
	<title>Bootcamp drivers aren't adequate for all systems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262353560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some Apple Fanboys are long on BS and short on facts.  The "mine works, what's the problem" comments bear witness to the lack of even the most simple research before posting.  The mid-2009 MacBook Pro's have a different manufacturer's audio system than earlier MBP's and quite simply, there are problems in Win7. The built-in microphone doesn't work and the audio output volume is too low to be really useable.  Someone has created a workaround for the audio out, but not the mic-in.  There are other problems, too, but the facts are obviously not too important for the "mine works" folks.  Apple sells their systems with Bootcamp as a selling point, then gives a promised date for the drivers, and then doesn't deliver.  There has never been an OS in the hands of more people in beta form than Win7.  Apple has had over a year to get this addressed.  We know why they haven't and it is very small-minded of them. They seem to be having increasing problems with dates. quality, and credibility.  This doesn't bode well for the future.  The MBP's are reallly nice machines and still a good value for the money when compared with Windows-only laptops, but they would be better if Apple would fulfill their commitments to their customers.  Some of us care about things like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some Apple Fanboys are long on BS and short on facts .
The " mine works , what 's the problem " comments bear witness to the lack of even the most simple research before posting .
The mid-2009 MacBook Pro 's have a different manufacturer 's audio system than earlier MBP 's and quite simply , there are problems in Win7 .
The built-in microphone does n't work and the audio output volume is too low to be really useable .
Someone has created a workaround for the audio out , but not the mic-in .
There are other problems , too , but the facts are obviously not too important for the " mine works " folks .
Apple sells their systems with Bootcamp as a selling point , then gives a promised date for the drivers , and then does n't deliver .
There has never been an OS in the hands of more people in beta form than Win7 .
Apple has had over a year to get this addressed .
We know why they have n't and it is very small-minded of them .
They seem to be having increasing problems with dates .
quality , and credibility .
This does n't bode well for the future .
The MBP 's are reallly nice machines and still a good value for the money when compared with Windows-only laptops , but they would be better if Apple would fulfill their commitments to their customers .
Some of us care about things like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some Apple Fanboys are long on BS and short on facts.
The "mine works, what's the problem" comments bear witness to the lack of even the most simple research before posting.
The mid-2009 MacBook Pro's have a different manufacturer's audio system than earlier MBP's and quite simply, there are problems in Win7.
The built-in microphone doesn't work and the audio output volume is too low to be really useable.
Someone has created a workaround for the audio out, but not the mic-in.
There are other problems, too, but the facts are obviously not too important for the "mine works" folks.
Apple sells their systems with Bootcamp as a selling point, then gives a promised date for the drivers, and then doesn't deliver.
There has never been an OS in the hands of more people in beta form than Win7.
Apple has had over a year to get this addressed.
We know why they haven't and it is very small-minded of them.
They seem to be having increasing problems with dates.
quality, and credibility.
This doesn't bode well for the future.
The MBP's are reallly nice machines and still a good value for the money when compared with Windows-only laptops, but they would be better if Apple would fulfill their commitments to their customers.
Some of us care about things like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618442</id>
	<title>Re:Why do you eschew choice?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262357280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you buy a Mac Laptop, you can run Windows, Linux or OS X, all fully supported.
</p><p>
If you buy a Windows laptop, you can't officially run OS X</p></div><p>...because Apple are being dicks about licensing OS X to "Windows laptop" makers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you buy a Mac Laptop , you can run Windows , Linux or OS X , all fully supported .
If you buy a Windows laptop , you ca n't officially run OS X...because Apple are being dicks about licensing OS X to " Windows laptop " makers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you buy a Mac Laptop, you can run Windows, Linux or OS X, all fully supported.
If you buy a Windows laptop, you can't officially run OS X...because Apple are being dicks about licensing OS X to "Windows laptop" makers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619600</id>
	<title>CAGE MATCH.  mac vs win vs linux vs virtual vs ...</title>
	<author>upuv</author>
	<datestamp>1262368860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great thread.</p><p>This one sucked in every fanboy on the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p><p>We have the virtual machine kids fighting it out in one corner.<br>We had native platform dudes in another.<br>We had the obligatory mac vs pc vs linux still going at it after 20 years<br>We even had an appearance from some GPU fanboys.</p><p>We have never seen so many replies marked down with Troll and Flame bait.</p><p>I could actually picture foam coming from some of the fanboys mouths as they had to respond to every thread they could.  And correct the religious misdeeds of the others.</p><p>All going at it at once.   Who wins?  ( ME.  I was highly entertained by the carnage. )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great thread.This one sucked in every fanboy on the /.We have the virtual machine kids fighting it out in one corner.We had native platform dudes in another.We had the obligatory mac vs pc vs linux still going at it after 20 yearsWe even had an appearance from some GPU fanboys.We have never seen so many replies marked down with Troll and Flame bait.I could actually picture foam coming from some of the fanboys mouths as they had to respond to every thread they could .
And correct the religious misdeeds of the others.All going at it at once .
Who wins ?
( ME .
I was highly entertained by the carnage .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great thread.This one sucked in every fanboy on the /.We have the virtual machine kids fighting it out in one corner.We had native platform dudes in another.We had the obligatory mac vs pc vs linux still going at it after 20 yearsWe even had an appearance from some GPU fanboys.We have never seen so many replies marked down with Troll and Flame bait.I could actually picture foam coming from some of the fanboys mouths as they had to respond to every thread they could.
And correct the religious misdeeds of the others.All going at it at once.
Who wins?
( ME.
I was highly entertained by the carnage.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619568</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262368500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>idiots buy macs then want to run windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>idiots buy macs then want to run windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>idiots buy macs then want to run windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620128</id>
	<title>Re:Apple Specific Drivers</title>
	<author>ishnaf</author>
	<datestamp>1262375220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>From what I heard, OS X uses certain low level functions that control processor speed/voltage within the OS itself versus what conventionally would be done through a BIOS on a normal PC. Apple uses EFI... I know that.

Just reading about some of the "dangers" if using a Mac to run Linux... main reason being, you have a likeliness of damaging the CPU if all you run are intensive tasks under Linux. Apple wrote drivers that deal with this stuff under Windows.</p></div><p>Is this true? If so, can anyone provide some references (as my googling was fruitless)? I'm currently doing exactly that after installing rEFIt on a Macbook Pro 5,3...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I heard , OS X uses certain low level functions that control processor speed/voltage within the OS itself versus what conventionally would be done through a BIOS on a normal PC .
Apple uses EFI... I know that .
Just reading about some of the " dangers " if using a Mac to run Linux... main reason being , you have a likeliness of damaging the CPU if all you run are intensive tasks under Linux .
Apple wrote drivers that deal with this stuff under Windows.Is this true ?
If so , can anyone provide some references ( as my googling was fruitless ) ?
I 'm currently doing exactly that after installing rEFIt on a Macbook Pro 5,3.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I heard, OS X uses certain low level functions that control processor speed/voltage within the OS itself versus what conventionally would be done through a BIOS on a normal PC.
Apple uses EFI... I know that.
Just reading about some of the "dangers" if using a Mac to run Linux... main reason being, you have a likeliness of damaging the CPU if all you run are intensive tasks under Linux.
Apple wrote drivers that deal with this stuff under Windows.Is this true?
If so, can anyone provide some references (as my googling was fruitless)?
I'm currently doing exactly that after installing rEFIt on a Macbook Pro 5,3...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</id>
	<title>The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262348640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no need to wait.  I installed Windows 7 bootcamp on the day it was released on Technet, and it worked fine with the Vista drivers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no need to wait .
I installed Windows 7 bootcamp on the day it was released on Technet , and it worked fine with the Vista drivers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no need to wait.
I installed Windows 7 bootcamp on the day it was released on Technet, and it worked fine with the Vista drivers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30623760</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262456640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you wanted a Windows laptop why would you pay all that money?</p></div><p>1. glass multi-touch track pad - it recognizes up to 4-finger gestures.<br>2. Mag-safe power cable - no more bad power jacks because someone accidentally trips on your power cord<br>3. Glass screen<br>4. aluminum unibody - feels solid, easy to clean, doesn't discolor &amp; fade like plastic<br>5. More compact &amp; portable than your usual low-end Dell or HP. You end up having to shell out Apple-like money to get sleeker Dells, HP's, Lenvo's, etc.</p><p>Instead of asking Mac users why they spent all that extra money, just go to a Best Buy or one of those damn hippie Apple stores, and just play with a MacBook for a while. I took the plunge and I started noticing the little details that set Apple's products apart from Dell.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you wanted a Windows laptop why would you pay all that money ? 1 .
glass multi-touch track pad - it recognizes up to 4-finger gestures.2 .
Mag-safe power cable - no more bad power jacks because someone accidentally trips on your power cord3 .
Glass screen4 .
aluminum unibody - feels solid , easy to clean , does n't discolor &amp; fade like plastic5 .
More compact &amp; portable than your usual low-end Dell or HP .
You end up having to shell out Apple-like money to get sleeker Dells , HP 's , Lenvo 's , etc.Instead of asking Mac users why they spent all that extra money , just go to a Best Buy or one of those damn hippie Apple stores , and just play with a MacBook for a while .
I took the plunge and I started noticing the little details that set Apple 's products apart from Dell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you wanted a Windows laptop why would you pay all that money?1.
glass multi-touch track pad - it recognizes up to 4-finger gestures.2.
Mag-safe power cable - no more bad power jacks because someone accidentally trips on your power cord3.
Glass screen4.
aluminum unibody - feels solid, easy to clean, doesn't discolor &amp; fade like plastic5.
More compact &amp; portable than your usual low-end Dell or HP.
You end up having to shell out Apple-like money to get sleeker Dells, HP's, Lenvo's, etc.Instead of asking Mac users why they spent all that extra money, just go to a Best Buy or one of those damn hippie Apple stores, and just play with a MacBook for a while.
I took the plunge and I started noticing the little details that set Apple's products apart from Dell.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619718</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>MobileTatsu-NJG</author>
	<datestamp>1262370060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you wanted a Windows laptop why would you pay all that money?</p></div><p>Windows serves me well in some applications, Mac serves me well in others.  Why would anybody on Slashdot need that explained to them?  If you're seriously interested in why somebody would want both, I'd be happy to go into detail.  But I hope you're not offended for wanting to know if you're seriously asking as opposed to bucking to be modded up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you wanted a Windows laptop why would you pay all that money ? Windows serves me well in some applications , Mac serves me well in others .
Why would anybody on Slashdot need that explained to them ?
If you 're seriously interested in why somebody would want both , I 'd be happy to go into detail .
But I hope you 're not offended for wanting to know if you 're seriously asking as opposed to bucking to be modded up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you wanted a Windows laptop why would you pay all that money?Windows serves me well in some applications, Mac serves me well in others.
Why would anybody on Slashdot need that explained to them?
If you're seriously interested in why somebody would want both, I'd be happy to go into detail.
But I hope you're not offended for wanting to know if you're seriously asking as opposed to bucking to be modded up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618784</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1262359800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about the special drivers that let you set the volume, screen brightness, etc?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about the special drivers that let you set the volume , screen brightness , etc ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about the special drivers that let you set the volume, screen brightness, etc?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617284</id>
	<title>Re:Umm...</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1262350200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who was the idiot who modded this troll?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who was the idiot who modded this troll ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who was the idiot who modded this troll?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619776</id>
	<title>ass</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262370900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>what an assinine commentary, obviously written by someone who hates apple because they aren't smart enough to run a unix based operating system</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what an assinine commentary , obviously written by someone who hates apple because they are n't smart enough to run a unix based operating system</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what an assinine commentary, obviously written by someone who hates apple because they aren't smart enough to run a unix based operating system</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618514</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>Professor\_UNIX</author>
	<datestamp>1262357880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because you can't run MacOS X on a generic laptop (easily or legally).  On the other hand, Windows 7 is magnificent and if I have to replace my Macbook Pro I'll probably just buy a Windows 7 based laptop and dual boot with Ubuntu.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because you ca n't run MacOS X on a generic laptop ( easily or legally ) .
On the other hand , Windows 7 is magnificent and if I have to replace my Macbook Pro I 'll probably just buy a Windows 7 based laptop and dual boot with Ubuntu .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because you can't run MacOS X on a generic laptop (easily or legally).
On the other hand, Windows 7 is magnificent and if I have to replace my Macbook Pro I'll probably just buy a Windows 7 based laptop and dual boot with Ubuntu.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619412</id>
	<title>Re:Stop with the "Better quality hardware"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262366280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bull-fucking-<i>shit</i> </p><p>

If you don't realize that a Macbook is of higher quality than a typical Dell or HP or whatever, you are either blind, stupid, or being paid to say otherwise.  Every square millimeter on a Mac is labored over with the most extreme attention to detail.  Even shit like the little rubber feet that go on the bottom are of higher quality and utility than on any other manufacturer's machines.  </p><p>

There's a difference between cheap and value.  Figure it out, motherfucker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bull-fucking-shit If you do n't realize that a Macbook is of higher quality than a typical Dell or HP or whatever , you are either blind , stupid , or being paid to say otherwise .
Every square millimeter on a Mac is labored over with the most extreme attention to detail .
Even shit like the little rubber feet that go on the bottom are of higher quality and utility than on any other manufacturer 's machines .
There 's a difference between cheap and value .
Figure it out , motherfucker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bull-fucking-shit 

If you don't realize that a Macbook is of higher quality than a typical Dell or HP or whatever, you are either blind, stupid, or being paid to say otherwise.
Every square millimeter on a Mac is labored over with the most extreme attention to detail.
Even shit like the little rubber feet that go on the bottom are of higher quality and utility than on any other manufacturer's machines.
There's a difference between cheap and value.
Figure it out, motherfucker.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620818</id>
	<title>Re:Why do you eschew choice?</title>
	<author>chammy</author>
	<datestamp>1262428320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Considering you also get better quality hardware</p></div><p>Really? Last time I heard, Apple used Foxconn parts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering you also get better quality hardwareReally ?
Last time I heard , Apple used Foxconn parts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering you also get better quality hardwareReally?
Last time I heard, Apple used Foxconn parts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30627656</id>
	<title>Re:Boot camp can't be trusted</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1262437140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>they are afraid of their customers having good experience with Windows and start to question their brand?</p></div><p>That is a distinct possibility. Microsoft took their lumps with Vista, but Windows 7 really does a bang up job from what I have experienced so far. In fact, Windows 7 might just be the first Microsoft OS to really give Apple a run for their money in slick user interfaces, eye candy and ease of use departments. It should also be noted that Microsoft retains a large advantage in number and variety of third party apps going forward, including open source apps, whereas Apple appears to be more concerned with their iPhone and mobile device (ala the rumored tablet) ecosystems. Even there Apple will come under pressure from Android and Google. Perhaps this will be enough to wipe those smiles of smug cult-of-mac users.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>they are afraid of their customers having good experience with Windows and start to question their brand ? That is a distinct possibility .
Microsoft took their lumps with Vista , but Windows 7 really does a bang up job from what I have experienced so far .
In fact , Windows 7 might just be the first Microsoft OS to really give Apple a run for their money in slick user interfaces , eye candy and ease of use departments .
It should also be noted that Microsoft retains a large advantage in number and variety of third party apps going forward , including open source apps , whereas Apple appears to be more concerned with their iPhone and mobile device ( ala the rumored tablet ) ecosystems .
Even there Apple will come under pressure from Android and Google .
Perhaps this will be enough to wipe those smiles of smug cult-of-mac users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they are afraid of their customers having good experience with Windows and start to question their brand?That is a distinct possibility.
Microsoft took their lumps with Vista, but Windows 7 really does a bang up job from what I have experienced so far.
In fact, Windows 7 might just be the first Microsoft OS to really give Apple a run for their money in slick user interfaces, eye candy and ease of use departments.
It should also be noted that Microsoft retains a large advantage in number and variety of third party apps going forward, including open source apps, whereas Apple appears to be more concerned with their iPhone and mobile device (ala the rumored tablet) ecosystems.
Even there Apple will come under pressure from Android and Google.
Perhaps this will be enough to wipe those smiles of smug cult-of-mac users.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621966</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262445060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe you shouldn't have bought an Apple to run Windows on...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe you should n't have bought an Apple to run Windows on.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe you shouldn't have bought an Apple to run Windows on...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618072</id>
	<title>OSX runs windows, Pystar runs OSX.</title>
	<author>tevita</author>
	<datestamp>1262355360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How does Apple do this, then leap all over Pystar?  Am I missing some hypocritical anomaly?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How does Apple do this , then leap all over Pystar ?
Am I missing some hypocritical anomaly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does Apple do this, then leap all over Pystar?
Am I missing some hypocritical anomaly?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617468</id>
	<title>/. jumping the gun</title>
	<author>SimonTheSoundMan</author>
	<datestamp>1262351820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Back in <b>October of this year</b>, Apple published a rather short, but affirmative promise stating quite simply that, 'Apple will support Microsoft Windows 7 (Home Premium, Professional, and Ultimate) with Boot Camp in Mac OS X Snow Leopard before the end of the year [CC].</p></div><p>Hang on, it's January.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in October of this year , Apple published a rather short , but affirmative promise stating quite simply that , 'Apple will support Microsoft Windows 7 ( Home Premium , Professional , and Ultimate ) with Boot Camp in Mac OS X Snow Leopard before the end of the year [ CC ] .Hang on , it 's January .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Back in October of this year, Apple published a rather short, but affirmative promise stating quite simply that, 'Apple will support Microsoft Windows 7 (Home Premium, Professional, and Ultimate) with Boot Camp in Mac OS X Snow Leopard before the end of the year [CC].Hang on, it's January.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617576</id>
	<title>Why not just call it...</title>
	<author>KillShill</author>
	<datestamp>1262352420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hypocrite Camp and be done with it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hypocrite Camp and be done with it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hypocrite Camp and be done with it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617354</id>
	<title>HUH???</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262350800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I installed Windows 7 on my Mac Pro the day it showed up on MSDN.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I installed Windows 7 on my Mac Pro the day it showed up on MSDN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I installed Windows 7 on my Mac Pro the day it showed up on MSDN.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619532</id>
	<title>Re:Stop with the "Better quality hardware"</title>
	<author>jo\_ham</author>
	<datestamp>1262367840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes it is, but in general we are talking vendor boxes here, so Apple is an off the shelf vendor in much the same way as Dell is.</p><p>Sure you can get all the nice parts and build a machine for yourself, or you can cut out the hassle and just buy one right from Apple - in a form that will run Windows, Linux and OS X with very little fuss.</p><p>I'm sure there is "better" hardware, but any way you cut it, the hardware is pretty good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes it is , but in general we are talking vendor boxes here , so Apple is an off the shelf vendor in much the same way as Dell is.Sure you can get all the nice parts and build a machine for yourself , or you can cut out the hassle and just buy one right from Apple - in a form that will run Windows , Linux and OS X with very little fuss.I 'm sure there is " better " hardware , but any way you cut it , the hardware is pretty good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes it is, but in general we are talking vendor boxes here, so Apple is an off the shelf vendor in much the same way as Dell is.Sure you can get all the nice parts and build a machine for yourself, or you can cut out the hassle and just buy one right from Apple - in a form that will run Windows, Linux and OS X with very little fuss.I'm sure there is "better" hardware, but any way you cut it, the hardware is pretty good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30628318</id>
	<title>Re:Why do you eschew choice? - Huh?</title>
	<author>meosborne</author>
	<datestamp>1262442780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You've got to be kidding, really. Apple absolutely refuses to allow anyone to use OS/X on non-apple hardware and you spin it as a *benefit* of Apple hardware. The only reason you can run other OS's on Apple hardware is that other companies aren't like Apple. That's a real benefit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've got to be kidding , really .
Apple absolutely refuses to allow anyone to use OS/X on non-apple hardware and you spin it as a * benefit * of Apple hardware .
The only reason you can run other OS 's on Apple hardware is that other companies are n't like Apple .
That 's a real benefit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've got to be kidding, really.
Apple absolutely refuses to allow anyone to use OS/X on non-apple hardware and you spin it as a *benefit* of Apple hardware.
The only reason you can run other OS's on Apple hardware is that other companies aren't like Apple.
That's a real benefit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30623732</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>wolrahnaes</author>
	<datestamp>1262456460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Odd.  I have the early 2008 (old chassis, 45nm processor) MBP15 and my roommate has the late 2008 equivalent (unibody chassis).  I've been running Windows 7 since beta and both of us installed it the weekend after it became available on Technet.</p><p>It required a bit of work to get the 64 bit version installed with 10.5's Boot Camp due to EFI conflicts, but these were resolved by 10.6's Boot Camp and in either case one could install the 32 bit version and skip the problem altogether (Vista and 7 only support EFI in 64 bit form, otherwise it's straight MBR booting)</p><p>Someone mentioned the video drivers being out of date, to which I say so what?  Windows 7 has proven itself excellent as far as I'm concerned with driver updates.  So far I've encountered one single major name video card which Windows Update couldn't pull the latest WHQL driver for, and that is a low-end Geforce 210 that was only released within the last month or so.  My MBP's 8600GT-M, my desktop's 8800GTX, and my media center's Radeon 4670 all had drivers loaded automatically.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Odd .
I have the early 2008 ( old chassis , 45nm processor ) MBP15 and my roommate has the late 2008 equivalent ( unibody chassis ) .
I 've been running Windows 7 since beta and both of us installed it the weekend after it became available on Technet.It required a bit of work to get the 64 bit version installed with 10.5 's Boot Camp due to EFI conflicts , but these were resolved by 10.6 's Boot Camp and in either case one could install the 32 bit version and skip the problem altogether ( Vista and 7 only support EFI in 64 bit form , otherwise it 's straight MBR booting ) Someone mentioned the video drivers being out of date , to which I say so what ?
Windows 7 has proven itself excellent as far as I 'm concerned with driver updates .
So far I 've encountered one single major name video card which Windows Update could n't pull the latest WHQL driver for , and that is a low-end Geforce 210 that was only released within the last month or so .
My MBP 's 8600GT-M , my desktop 's 8800GTX , and my media center 's Radeon 4670 all had drivers loaded automatically .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Odd.
I have the early 2008 (old chassis, 45nm processor) MBP15 and my roommate has the late 2008 equivalent (unibody chassis).
I've been running Windows 7 since beta and both of us installed it the weekend after it became available on Technet.It required a bit of work to get the 64 bit version installed with 10.5's Boot Camp due to EFI conflicts, but these were resolved by 10.6's Boot Camp and in either case one could install the 32 bit version and skip the problem altogether (Vista and 7 only support EFI in 64 bit form, otherwise it's straight MBR booting)Someone mentioned the video drivers being out of date, to which I say so what?
Windows 7 has proven itself excellent as far as I'm concerned with driver updates.
So far I've encountered one single major name video card which Windows Update couldn't pull the latest WHQL driver for, and that is a low-end Geforce 210 that was only released within the last month or so.
My MBP's 8600GT-M, my desktop's 8800GTX, and my media center's Radeon 4670 all had drivers loaded automatically.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619300</id>
	<title>Re:uhhh...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262364960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe they're waiting for iSlate?</p></div><p>iGuess...</p></div><p>No, it just isLate.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they 're waiting for iSlate ? iGuess...No , it just isLate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they're waiting for iSlate?iGuess...No, it just isLate.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30626862</id>
	<title>Re:Stop with the "Better quality hardware"</title>
	<author>IANAAC</author>
	<datestamp>1262431920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>
Every square millimeter on a Mac is labored over with the most extreme attention to detail. Even shit like the little rubber feet that go on the bottom are of higher quality and utility than on any other manufacturer's machines.
</i></p><p><i>
There's a difference between cheap and value. Figure it out, motherfucker.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>
Ci-fucking-tation, please.
</p><p>
Seriously, is it impossible for people to respond in something other than stoner-speak?  And not as an Anonymous Coward?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every square millimeter on a Mac is labored over with the most extreme attention to detail .
Even shit like the little rubber feet that go on the bottom are of higher quality and utility than on any other manufacturer 's machines .
There 's a difference between cheap and value .
Figure it out , motherfucker .
Ci-fucking-tation , please .
Seriously , is it impossible for people to respond in something other than stoner-speak ?
And not as an Anonymous Coward ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 
Every square millimeter on a Mac is labored over with the most extreme attention to detail.
Even shit like the little rubber feet that go on the bottom are of higher quality and utility than on any other manufacturer's machines.
There's a difference between cheap and value.
Figure it out, motherfucker.
Ci-fucking-tation, please.
Seriously, is it impossible for people to respond in something other than stoner-speak?
And not as an Anonymous Coward?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618806</id>
	<title>Re:Apple Specific Drivers</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1262359980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>you have a likeliness of damaging the CPU if all you run are intensive tasks under Linux.</p> </div><p>[citation needed]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>you have a likeliness of damaging the CPU if all you run are intensive tasks under Linux .
[ citation needed ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you have a likeliness of damaging the CPU if all you run are intensive tasks under Linux.
[citation needed]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618454</id>
	<title>Re:Stop with the "Better quality hardware"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262357400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes but very few are incorporating the smaller quality components, sure it is the same CPU and GPU (because the manufacturers for those items are absolutely dominant). But the quality of drives, Nic Cards, Mother Boards, etc.. etc.. all have a dramatic effect on the end product. One of the only PC manufacturers providing the level of quality components that apples does is Sager.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes but very few are incorporating the smaller quality components , sure it is the same CPU and GPU ( because the manufacturers for those items are absolutely dominant ) .
But the quality of drives , Nic Cards , Mother Boards , etc.. etc.. all have a dramatic effect on the end product .
One of the only PC manufacturers providing the level of quality components that apples does is Sager .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes but very few are incorporating the smaller quality components, sure it is the same CPU and GPU (because the manufacturers for those items are absolutely dominant).
But the quality of drives, Nic Cards, Mother Boards, etc.. etc.. all have a dramatic effect on the end product.
One of the only PC manufacturers providing the level of quality components that apples does is Sager.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30627500</id>
	<title>Re:Its Very Doable now</title>
	<author>anethema</author>
	<datestamp>1262436060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually I realize now that even though very few will be reading now the "ac" between those two links was a fuckup, I meant to say to install the latest realtek sound drivers as well.<br><br>Mea Culpa.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I realize now that even though very few will be reading now the " ac " between those two links was a fuckup , I meant to say to install the latest realtek sound drivers as well.Mea Culpa .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I realize now that even though very few will be reading now the "ac" between those two links was a fuckup, I meant to say to install the latest realtek sound drivers as well.Mea Culpa.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617246</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>Guy Harris</author>
	<datestamp>1262349900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Because some people have applications that need Windows to run for work, school, home, etc. that don't run nicely in VirtualBox.</p></div><p>And not on Parallels Workstation or VMWare Fusion either, presumably.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because some people have applications that need Windows to run for work , school , home , etc .
that do n't run nicely in VirtualBox.And not on Parallels Workstation or VMWare Fusion either , presumably .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because some people have applications that need Windows to run for work, school, home, etc.
that don't run nicely in VirtualBox.And not on Parallels Workstation or VMWare Fusion either, presumably.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222</id>
	<title>Bootcamp a gimmick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262349780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I always saw bootcamp as a gimmick to encourage MS Windows users to switch to Apple Hardware.  If one buys a mac, and really can't stand OS X, one can always go back to MS Windows.  Or if MS Windows must be run occasionally, then Bootcamp is an effective way to do so.
<p>
While it is valid to complain that Apple missed a deadline, I am kind of surprised that Apple even made the effort to create a deadline.  I cannot imagine people paying Apple prices to run MS Windows on an exclusive basis.  I can imagine them paying such prices to run virtual machines with other OS.
</p><p>
I would rather see Apple point customers toward Parallels or Fusion rather than working on trying to get MS Windows to work as the base OS.  What would be even more cool is a kernal that could then be used to run any number of OS in virtual mode.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always saw bootcamp as a gimmick to encourage MS Windows users to switch to Apple Hardware .
If one buys a mac , and really ca n't stand OS X , one can always go back to MS Windows .
Or if MS Windows must be run occasionally , then Bootcamp is an effective way to do so .
While it is valid to complain that Apple missed a deadline , I am kind of surprised that Apple even made the effort to create a deadline .
I can not imagine people paying Apple prices to run MS Windows on an exclusive basis .
I can imagine them paying such prices to run virtual machines with other OS .
I would rather see Apple point customers toward Parallels or Fusion rather than working on trying to get MS Windows to work as the base OS .
What would be even more cool is a kernal that could then be used to run any number of OS in virtual mode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always saw bootcamp as a gimmick to encourage MS Windows users to switch to Apple Hardware.
If one buys a mac, and really can't stand OS X, one can always go back to MS Windows.
Or if MS Windows must be run occasionally, then Bootcamp is an effective way to do so.
While it is valid to complain that Apple missed a deadline, I am kind of surprised that Apple even made the effort to create a deadline.
I cannot imagine people paying Apple prices to run MS Windows on an exclusive basis.
I can imagine them paying such prices to run virtual machines with other OS.
I would rather see Apple point customers toward Parallels or Fusion rather than working on trying to get MS Windows to work as the base OS.
What would be even more cool is a kernal that could then be used to run any number of OS in virtual mode.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618824</id>
	<title>Boot camp can't be trusted</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1262360160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have noticed 2 major issues with Boot Camp coming with the "snow leopard" DVD and I started to believe Apple doesn't want users to have good performance on Windows. Or, they don't have slightest clue about importance of these things.</p><p>1) The NVidia GPU drivers coming with Snow Leopard DVD (and there are no updates) are \_old\_. One would think "well, they could prefer stability", no it is not the case either. The stuff offered at NVidia drivers page are WHQL certified by default too. 9400M is especially a GPU/Integrated GPU hybrid, it really needs up to date, latest driver software to function properly.</p><p>2) Now, this is not a trivial thing to fix like heading to nvidia and download a driver. SATA on latest gen Mac Mini (and Intel based stuff) is not properly identified to Windows via MBR or "BIOS". There isn't much information there but in case of Intel SATA controller, it is documented and you can take a real big risk of MBR tweaking with some ready to use tools and identify SATA/AHCI situation to Windows, thanks to NCQ like features \_only\_ available to AHCI (at least under win), 2-3x performance hit may occur. NVidia chipset having Mac Minis who really needs whatever software performance they need (they run 2.5"). I did every documented, undocumented, dangerous trick on book to have 20 MB/sec pathetic speed. Same drive on same hardware hits 60-70MB/sec on OS X.</p><p>As Nvidia won't give specs to a chipset nerd or end user, things would really change in case of Apple themselves contacting them. I really believe people who can do crazy things like putting a virtual BIOS on top of EFI etc would manage to change couple of bytes. I started to believe that it is Apple who wants their users,customers to have junk like performance on Windows. Perhaps with the recent Win 7 hype, they are afraid of their customers having good experience with Windows and start to question their brand?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have noticed 2 major issues with Boot Camp coming with the " snow leopard " DVD and I started to believe Apple does n't want users to have good performance on Windows .
Or , they do n't have slightest clue about importance of these things.1 ) The NVidia GPU drivers coming with Snow Leopard DVD ( and there are no updates ) are \ _old \ _ .
One would think " well , they could prefer stability " , no it is not the case either .
The stuff offered at NVidia drivers page are WHQL certified by default too .
9400M is especially a GPU/Integrated GPU hybrid , it really needs up to date , latest driver software to function properly.2 ) Now , this is not a trivial thing to fix like heading to nvidia and download a driver .
SATA on latest gen Mac Mini ( and Intel based stuff ) is not properly identified to Windows via MBR or " BIOS " .
There is n't much information there but in case of Intel SATA controller , it is documented and you can take a real big risk of MBR tweaking with some ready to use tools and identify SATA/AHCI situation to Windows , thanks to NCQ like features \ _only \ _ available to AHCI ( at least under win ) , 2-3x performance hit may occur .
NVidia chipset having Mac Minis who really needs whatever software performance they need ( they run 2.5 " ) .
I did every documented , undocumented , dangerous trick on book to have 20 MB/sec pathetic speed .
Same drive on same hardware hits 60-70MB/sec on OS X.As Nvidia wo n't give specs to a chipset nerd or end user , things would really change in case of Apple themselves contacting them .
I really believe people who can do crazy things like putting a virtual BIOS on top of EFI etc would manage to change couple of bytes .
I started to believe that it is Apple who wants their users,customers to have junk like performance on Windows .
Perhaps with the recent Win 7 hype , they are afraid of their customers having good experience with Windows and start to question their brand ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have noticed 2 major issues with Boot Camp coming with the "snow leopard" DVD and I started to believe Apple doesn't want users to have good performance on Windows.
Or, they don't have slightest clue about importance of these things.1) The NVidia GPU drivers coming with Snow Leopard DVD (and there are no updates) are \_old\_.
One would think "well, they could prefer stability", no it is not the case either.
The stuff offered at NVidia drivers page are WHQL certified by default too.
9400M is especially a GPU/Integrated GPU hybrid, it really needs up to date, latest driver software to function properly.2) Now, this is not a trivial thing to fix like heading to nvidia and download a driver.
SATA on latest gen Mac Mini (and Intel based stuff) is not properly identified to Windows via MBR or "BIOS".
There isn't much information there but in case of Intel SATA controller, it is documented and you can take a real big risk of MBR tweaking with some ready to use tools and identify SATA/AHCI situation to Windows, thanks to NCQ like features \_only\_ available to AHCI (at least under win), 2-3x performance hit may occur.
NVidia chipset having Mac Minis who really needs whatever software performance they need (they run 2.5").
I did every documented, undocumented, dangerous trick on book to have 20 MB/sec pathetic speed.
Same drive on same hardware hits 60-70MB/sec on OS X.As Nvidia won't give specs to a chipset nerd or end user, things would really change in case of Apple themselves contacting them.
I really believe people who can do crazy things like putting a virtual BIOS on top of EFI etc would manage to change couple of bytes.
I started to believe that it is Apple who wants their users,customers to have junk like performance on Windows.
Perhaps with the recent Win 7 hype, they are afraid of their customers having good experience with Windows and start to question their brand?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618142</id>
	<title>Re:Bootcamp a gimmick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262355660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, I know, games.  Yet I somehow run Autodesk software in a virtual machine.  Go figure.  Ok, so maybe boot camp is important for those who aren't getting any loving.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I know , games .
Yet I somehow run Autodesk software in a virtual machine .
Go figure .
Ok , so maybe boot camp is important for those who are n't getting any loving .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I know, games.
Yet I somehow run Autodesk software in a virtual machine.
Go figure.
Ok, so maybe boot camp is important for those who aren't getting any loving.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621512</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>mr\_lizard13</author>
	<datestamp>1262439660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because I already have a Mac, and I wanted to use a couple of Windows-only programs.
<br>
<br>
My options were: buy a new computer which comes with Windows pre-installed (from about &pound;400), or just buy a Windows 7 license and use that on my existing Mac (from &pound;50)
<br>
<br>
Option 2 was cheaper.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because I already have a Mac , and I wanted to use a couple of Windows-only programs .
My options were : buy a new computer which comes with Windows pre-installed ( from about   400 ) , or just buy a Windows 7 license and use that on my existing Mac ( from   50 ) Option 2 was cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because I already have a Mac, and I wanted to use a couple of Windows-only programs.
My options were: buy a new computer which comes with Windows pre-installed (from about £400), or just buy a Windows 7 license and use that on my existing Mac (from £50)


Option 2 was cheaper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617498</id>
	<title>Re:Virtualbox</title>
	<author>binarylarry</author>
	<datestamp>1262351940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not entirely correct.</p><p>Virtualizing the graphics card already has support for all the major VMs (VirtualBox, VMWare, Parallels, etc) and it's being actively worked on with support from the big GPU ISVs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not entirely correct.Virtualizing the graphics card already has support for all the major VMs ( VirtualBox , VMWare , Parallels , etc ) and it 's being actively worked on with support from the big GPU ISVs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not entirely correct.Virtualizing the graphics card already has support for all the major VMs (VirtualBox, VMWare, Parallels, etc) and it's being actively worked on with support from the big GPU ISVs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617466</id>
	<title>BZZZZT</title>
	<author>Azureflare</author>
	<datestamp>1262351820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry, this story is just plain wrong. Windows 7 works fine under the existing bootcamp. Macs are just glorified Intel machines after all. As long as you expose the bios interface that allows windows xp/vista to run, windows 7 will run fine too.<br> <br>
Sure, there may be a grain of truth in the article. Windows 7 is not "officially" supported by Apple. Neither is linux, and that runs fine on Macs too!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , this story is just plain wrong .
Windows 7 works fine under the existing bootcamp .
Macs are just glorified Intel machines after all .
As long as you expose the bios interface that allows windows xp/vista to run , windows 7 will run fine too .
Sure , there may be a grain of truth in the article .
Windows 7 is not " officially " supported by Apple .
Neither is linux , and that runs fine on Macs too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, this story is just plain wrong.
Windows 7 works fine under the existing bootcamp.
Macs are just glorified Intel machines after all.
As long as you expose the bios interface that allows windows xp/vista to run, windows 7 will run fine too.
Sure, there may be a grain of truth in the article.
Windows 7 is not "officially" supported by Apple.
Neither is linux, and that runs fine on Macs too!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617696</id>
	<title>Re:Why do you eschew choice?</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1262353320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't eschew choice; I eschew carrying around a small box with a large price tag and a conspicuous "steal me" icon on the lid.</p><p>I also eschew the anemic power of laptops compared to desktops (where's my quad core already?) and so long as I'm compromising, I might as well save some money in the process.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't eschew choice ; I eschew carrying around a small box with a large price tag and a conspicuous " steal me " icon on the lid.I also eschew the anemic power of laptops compared to desktops ( where 's my quad core already ?
) and so long as I 'm compromising , I might as well save some money in the process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't eschew choice; I eschew carrying around a small box with a large price tag and a conspicuous "steal me" icon on the lid.I also eschew the anemic power of laptops compared to desktops (where's my quad core already?
) and so long as I'm compromising, I might as well save some money in the process.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617352</id>
	<title>Re:Virtualbox</title>
	<author>BrentH</author>
	<datestamp>1262350800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Graphic cards arent virtualized. So if you want games, you gotta go to the Bootcamp!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Graphic cards arent virtualized .
So if you want games , you got ta go to the Bootcamp !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Graphic cards arent virtualized.
So if you want games, you gotta go to the Bootcamp!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617442</id>
	<title>Stop with the "Better quality hardware"</title>
	<author>IANAAC</author>
	<datestamp>1262351580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's readily available in non-Apple form.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's readily available in non-Apple form .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's readily available in non-Apple form.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618814</id>
	<title>please, crawl back under your bridge.</title>
	<author>the\_fat\_kid</author>
	<datestamp>1262360100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"From what I heard" is not a source. Nor is it an excuse to spout such nonsense.<br>I'm going to hurt my CPU if i Linux too hard?<br>try that preview thingy once and a while.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" From what I heard " is not a source .
Nor is it an excuse to spout such nonsense.I 'm going to hurt my CPU if i Linux too hard ? try that preview thingy once and a while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"From what I heard" is not a source.
Nor is it an excuse to spout such nonsense.I'm going to hurt my CPU if i Linux too hard?try that preview thingy once and a while.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30623568</id>
	<title>What?</title>
	<author>trayrace</author>
	<datestamp>1262455680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have no problem running 32-bit editon of Windows 7 on my MacBook. All the drivers installed nicely, using Vista compatibility mode. On 64-bit edition, however, I couldn't install ANY Apple drivers for some reason and I had to reinstall the whole system to 32 bits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no problem running 32-bit editon of Windows 7 on my MacBook .
All the drivers installed nicely , using Vista compatibility mode .
On 64-bit edition , however , I could n't install ANY Apple drivers for some reason and I had to reinstall the whole system to 32 bits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no problem running 32-bit editon of Windows 7 on my MacBook.
All the drivers installed nicely, using Vista compatibility mode.
On 64-bit edition, however, I couldn't install ANY Apple drivers for some reason and I had to reinstall the whole system to 32 bits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618340</id>
	<title>What are you talking about?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262356680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been running Windows 7 on an Apple with Snow Leopard for months now.</p><p>But you say it can't be done...hmmm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been running Windows 7 on an Apple with Snow Leopard for months now.But you say it ca n't be done...hmmm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been running Windows 7 on an Apple with Snow Leopard for months now.But you say it can't be done...hmmm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30625688</id>
	<title>Re:Virtualbox</title>
	<author>BrentH</author>
	<datestamp>1262424360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Technically they're not virtualizing the videocards, but rerouting and remapping API-calls (be they DirectX or OpenGL). That's why software support and speed aren't even close to direct access.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Technically they 're not virtualizing the videocards , but rerouting and remapping API-calls ( be they DirectX or OpenGL ) .
That 's why software support and speed are n't even close to direct access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technically they're not virtualizing the videocards, but rerouting and remapping API-calls (be they DirectX or OpenGL).
That's why software support and speed aren't even close to direct access.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620970</id>
	<title>Re:Why do you eschew choice?</title>
	<author>furball</author>
	<datestamp>1262431080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't need a script to get a keyboard shortcut to lock the screen.</p><p><a href="http://www.macworld.com/article/49080/2006/01/lockscreen.html" title="macworld.com">http://www.macworld.com/article/49080/2006/01/lockscreen.html</a> [macworld.com]</p><p>It's the first result when you Google for "keyboard shortcut to lock screen mac".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need a script to get a keyboard shortcut to lock the screen.http : //www.macworld.com/article/49080/2006/01/lockscreen.html [ macworld.com ] It 's the first result when you Google for " keyboard shortcut to lock screen mac " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need a script to get a keyboard shortcut to lock the screen.http://www.macworld.com/article/49080/2006/01/lockscreen.html [macworld.com]It's the first result when you Google for "keyboard shortcut to lock screen mac".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620608</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262425080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I installed Win7 on a 2008 (black) MacBook.<br>None of the issues you are reporting are present.<br>There are certain steps you have to take to ensure this (use Windows 7 update for drivers first and then the OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard for remaining drivers, finally download latest bootcamp via Apple Software Update), but that's about it.<br>I think you should check again the right steps and it will be working fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I installed Win7 on a 2008 ( black ) MacBook.None of the issues you are reporting are present.There are certain steps you have to take to ensure this ( use Windows 7 update for drivers first and then the OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard for remaining drivers , finally download latest bootcamp via Apple Software Update ) , but that 's about it.I think you should check again the right steps and it will be working fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I installed Win7 on a 2008 (black) MacBook.None of the issues you are reporting are present.There are certain steps you have to take to ensure this (use Windows 7 update for drivers first and then the OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard for remaining drivers, finally download latest bootcamp via Apple Software Update), but that's about it.I think you should check again the right steps and it will be working fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30622246</id>
	<title>Re:Bootcamp a gimmick</title>
	<author>Dr. Zim</author>
	<datestamp>1262447700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I cannot imagine people paying Apple prices to run MS Windows on an exclusive basis.  I can imagine them paying such prices to run virtual machines with other OS.</p></div><p>Take a look at the executive conference room. Lots of PHBs love having their slim little macbook pros and macbook airs as status symbols, but still run XP and Vista because they can't be bothered to learn something new.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can not imagine people paying Apple prices to run MS Windows on an exclusive basis .
I can imagine them paying such prices to run virtual machines with other OS.Take a look at the executive conference room .
Lots of PHBs love having their slim little macbook pros and macbook airs as status symbols , but still run XP and Vista because they ca n't be bothered to learn something new .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I cannot imagine people paying Apple prices to run MS Windows on an exclusive basis.
I can imagine them paying such prices to run virtual machines with other OS.Take a look at the executive conference room.
Lots of PHBs love having their slim little macbook pros and macbook airs as status symbols, but still run XP and Vista because they can't be bothered to learn something new.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618234</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>Psyborgue</author>
	<datestamp>1262356140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Same here.  I have Leopard and Win 7 64 bit on my macbook pro (Santa Rosa).  Works perfectly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here .
I have Leopard and Win 7 64 bit on my macbook pro ( Santa Rosa ) .
Works perfectly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here.
I have Leopard and Win 7 64 bit on my macbook pro (Santa Rosa).
Works perfectly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617934</id>
	<title>why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262354580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>why pay premium for apple and then just put windows on anyway?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>why pay premium for apple and then just put windows on anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why pay premium for apple and then just put windows on anyway?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30632700</id>
	<title>Windows 7 installs fine on MBP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262544000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh...not sure why people are having a problem.  I installed 7 the other day on my 2009 17" MBP and it runs fine.  I had XP installed, so I booted from the 7 dvd, selected the partition, installed it and then put in my snow leopard disc to install the drivers, worked perfectly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh...not sure why people are having a problem .
I installed 7 the other day on my 2009 17 " MBP and it runs fine .
I had XP installed , so I booted from the 7 dvd , selected the partition , installed it and then put in my snow leopard disc to install the drivers , worked perfectly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh...not sure why people are having a problem.
I installed 7 the other day on my 2009 17" MBP and it runs fine.
I had XP installed, so I booted from the 7 dvd, selected the partition, installed it and then put in my snow leopard disc to install the drivers, worked perfectly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618374</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>Sam36</author>
	<datestamp>1262356920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>WINDOWS sucks you stupid troll<br> GRRRRRR</htmltext>
<tokenext>WINDOWS sucks you stupid troll GRRRRRR</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WINDOWS sucks you stupid troll GRRRRRR</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619364</id>
	<title>iMac7,1, Boot Camp and Windows 7 x64</title>
	<author>iMouse</author>
	<datestamp>1262365800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No problems here running Windows 7 Professional x64 on a 2007 20" iMac 2.4 (iMac7,1).</p><p>I had two tweaks that I had to perform.  One tweak was due to a M$ screw-up and the other is a Boot Camp x64 driver compatibility issue.</p><p>1.  Just set up a Boot Camp partition like you normally do, throw in the Windows 7 disc when prompted.  If you see nothing but a black screen that says "Select CD-ROM Boot Type", please see the link below.  This is a known issue with some downloadable Server 2008 / Windows 7 media provided by Microsoft in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.iso form.</p><p><a href="http://sergiomcfly.blogspot.com/2008/04/select-cd-rom-boot-type-when-installing.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://sergiomcfly.blogspot.com/2008/04/select-cd-rom-boot-type-when-installing.html</a> [blogspot.com]</p><p>2.  Format the BOOTCAMP partition (do not remove it, just format it and the installation process should start)</p><p>3.  Once Windows 7 is installed and at the desktop, locate your Command Prompt, right-click and "Run As Administrator"</p><p>4.  Insert your Snow Leopard disc (or other media containing the Boot Camp 3.0 drivers) and run the BootCamp64.msi from D:\Drivers\Apple\BootCamp64.msi</p><p>Instead of receiving the error message "Boot Camp x64 is unsupported on this computer model." when running the main Setup.exe, the 64-bit Vista drivers will install on Windows 7 x64 just fine.  All hardware seems to be properly supported, although I replaced the Apple ATI Radeon HD 2600 driver with a current version from the ATI site for gaming performance purposes.</p><p>VMware Fusion 3.0.1 tied into the Windows 7 x64 Boot Camp partition works just fine as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No problems here running Windows 7 Professional x64 on a 2007 20 " iMac 2.4 ( iMac7,1 ) .I had two tweaks that I had to perform .
One tweak was due to a M $ screw-up and the other is a Boot Camp x64 driver compatibility issue.1 .
Just set up a Boot Camp partition like you normally do , throw in the Windows 7 disc when prompted .
If you see nothing but a black screen that says " Select CD-ROM Boot Type " , please see the link below .
This is a known issue with some downloadable Server 2008 / Windows 7 media provided by Microsoft in .iso form.http : //sergiomcfly.blogspot.com/2008/04/select-cd-rom-boot-type-when-installing.html [ blogspot.com ] 2 .
Format the BOOTCAMP partition ( do not remove it , just format it and the installation process should start ) 3 .
Once Windows 7 is installed and at the desktop , locate your Command Prompt , right-click and " Run As Administrator " 4 .
Insert your Snow Leopard disc ( or other media containing the Boot Camp 3.0 drivers ) and run the BootCamp64.msi from D : \ Drivers \ Apple \ BootCamp64.msiInstead of receiving the error message " Boot Camp x64 is unsupported on this computer model .
" when running the main Setup.exe , the 64-bit Vista drivers will install on Windows 7 x64 just fine .
All hardware seems to be properly supported , although I replaced the Apple ATI Radeon HD 2600 driver with a current version from the ATI site for gaming performance purposes.VMware Fusion 3.0.1 tied into the Windows 7 x64 Boot Camp partition works just fine as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No problems here running Windows 7 Professional x64 on a 2007 20" iMac 2.4 (iMac7,1).I had two tweaks that I had to perform.
One tweak was due to a M$ screw-up and the other is a Boot Camp x64 driver compatibility issue.1.
Just set up a Boot Camp partition like you normally do, throw in the Windows 7 disc when prompted.
If you see nothing but a black screen that says "Select CD-ROM Boot Type", please see the link below.
This is a known issue with some downloadable Server 2008 / Windows 7 media provided by Microsoft in .iso form.http://sergiomcfly.blogspot.com/2008/04/select-cd-rom-boot-type-when-installing.html [blogspot.com]2.
Format the BOOTCAMP partition (do not remove it, just format it and the installation process should start)3.
Once Windows 7 is installed and at the desktop, locate your Command Prompt, right-click and "Run As Administrator"4.
Insert your Snow Leopard disc (or other media containing the Boot Camp 3.0 drivers) and run the BootCamp64.msi from D:\Drivers\Apple\BootCamp64.msiInstead of receiving the error message "Boot Camp x64 is unsupported on this computer model.
" when running the main Setup.exe, the 64-bit Vista drivers will install on Windows 7 x64 just fine.
All hardware seems to be properly supported, although I replaced the Apple ATI Radeon HD 2600 driver with a current version from the ATI site for gaming performance purposes.VMware Fusion 3.0.1 tied into the Windows 7 x64 Boot Camp partition works just fine as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617606</id>
	<title>Its Very Doable now</title>
	<author>anethema</author>
	<datestamp>1262352720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here is some info not provided in the rest of the 'I'm posting from Win7" posts here is some helpful information.<br><br>First, the Snow Leopard DVD includes boot camp 3.0, which VASTLY improves the use of the touchpad under Windows XP or Vista. It also mostly works under Windows 7.<br><br>If you don't have a Snow Leopard DVD, here is a link to the drivers on TPB:<br><br>http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5054638/Bootcamp\_Driver\_3.0\_for\_Windows\_32bit\_\_amp\_\_64bit\_\%28from\_Snow\_Leopard<br><br>After installing this updating the sound drivers and video drivers would be advisable since the ones that come in boot camp suck and/or cause crashes.<br><br>http://www.nvidia.com/Download/index.aspx?lang=en-us for video drivers. Select windows-7 then 32 or 64 bit depending on which you've chosen.<br>ac<br>http://www.realtek.com.tw/downloads/downloadsView.aspx?Langid=1&amp;PNid=14&amp;PFid=24&amp;Level=4&amp;Conn=3&amp;DownTypeID=3&amp;GetDown=false<br><br>After this it should be reasonably stable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is some info not provided in the rest of the 'I 'm posting from Win7 " posts here is some helpful information.First , the Snow Leopard DVD includes boot camp 3.0 , which VASTLY improves the use of the touchpad under Windows XP or Vista .
It also mostly works under Windows 7.If you do n't have a Snow Leopard DVD , here is a link to the drivers on TPB : http : //thepiratebay.org/torrent/5054638/Bootcamp \ _Driver \ _3.0 \ _for \ _Windows \ _32bit \ _ \ _amp \ _ \ _64bit \ _ \ % 28from \ _Snow \ _LeopardAfter installing this updating the sound drivers and video drivers would be advisable since the ones that come in boot camp suck and/or cause crashes.http : //www.nvidia.com/Download/index.aspx ? lang = en-us for video drivers .
Select windows-7 then 32 or 64 bit depending on which you 've chosen.achttp : //www.realtek.com.tw/downloads/downloadsView.aspx ? Langid = 1&amp;PNid = 14&amp;PFid = 24&amp;Level = 4&amp;Conn = 3&amp;DownTypeID = 3&amp;GetDown = falseAfter this it should be reasonably stable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is some info not provided in the rest of the 'I'm posting from Win7" posts here is some helpful information.First, the Snow Leopard DVD includes boot camp 3.0, which VASTLY improves the use of the touchpad under Windows XP or Vista.
It also mostly works under Windows 7.If you don't have a Snow Leopard DVD, here is a link to the drivers on TPB:http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5054638/Bootcamp\_Driver\_3.0\_for\_Windows\_32bit\_\_amp\_\_64bit\_\%28from\_Snow\_LeopardAfter installing this updating the sound drivers and video drivers would be advisable since the ones that come in boot camp suck and/or cause crashes.http://www.nvidia.com/Download/index.aspx?lang=en-us for video drivers.
Select windows-7 then 32 or 64 bit depending on which you've chosen.achttp://www.realtek.com.tw/downloads/downloadsView.aspx?Langid=1&amp;PNid=14&amp;PFid=24&amp;Level=4&amp;Conn=3&amp;DownTypeID=3&amp;GetDown=falseAfter this it should be reasonably stable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620700</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262426400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are correct in that the OEM drivers built into Windows 7 do not support Apple hardware.</p><p>Just install the drivers off the OS X DVD into Windows 7 and all that hardware will work.</p><p>If your complaint is the drivers are not built into Win7, then you are complaining at the wrong company.  Apple does not make Windows 7...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are correct in that the OEM drivers built into Windows 7 do not support Apple hardware.Just install the drivers off the OS X DVD into Windows 7 and all that hardware will work.If your complaint is the drivers are not built into Win7 , then you are complaining at the wrong company .
Apple does not make Windows 7.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are correct in that the OEM drivers built into Windows 7 do not support Apple hardware.Just install the drivers off the OS X DVD into Windows 7 and all that hardware will work.If your complaint is the drivers are not built into Win7, then you are complaining at the wrong company.
Apple does not make Windows 7...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618556</id>
	<title>No issues here</title>
	<author>trapnest</author>
	<datestamp>1262358180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 7 x86\_64 and Snow Leopard on a Macbook Pro 5,1 here. No issues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 x86 \ _64 and Snow Leopard on a Macbook Pro 5,1 here .
No issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 x86\_64 and Snow Leopard on a Macbook Pro 5,1 here.
No issues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617384</id>
	<title>Re:Bootcamp a gimmick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262351040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Games games game games games. Games, games game games. Games = games. Game games; games, games games games, games and games. Games? Games!</p><p>Games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Games games game games games .
Games , games game games .
Games = games .
Game games ; games , games games games , games and games .
Games ? Games ! Games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games games game games games.
Games, games game games.
Games = games.
Game games; games, games games games, games and games.
Games? Games!Games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621780</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>svirre</author>
	<datestamp>1262443140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can second that. My macbook pro (pre-unibody) runs windows 7 just fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can second that .
My macbook pro ( pre-unibody ) runs windows 7 just fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can second that.
My macbook pro (pre-unibody) runs windows 7 just fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617398</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1262351100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Because some people have applications that need Windows to run for work, school, home, etc. that don't run nicely in VirtualBox."</p></div></blockquote><p>Name one.  I bet you can't.  <b> <i>Windows</i> </b> runs on VirtualBox and simply thinks it is running on different hardware than it is actually running on.  What the hell kind of applications can't run on Windows just because the hardware is different?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Because some people have applications that need Windows to run for work , school , home , etc .
that do n't run nicely in VirtualBox .
" Name one .
I bet you ca n't .
Windows runs on VirtualBox and simply thinks it is running on different hardware than it is actually running on .
What the hell kind of applications ca n't run on Windows just because the hardware is different ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Because some people have applications that need Windows to run for work, school, home, etc.
that don't run nicely in VirtualBox.
"Name one.
I bet you can't.
Windows  runs on VirtualBox and simply thinks it is running on different hardware than it is actually running on.
What the hell kind of applications can't run on Windows just because the hardware is different?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619802</id>
	<title>No problems with Snow Leopard/Windows 7 on MacBook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262371140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm writing this from my MacBook running Windows7 via boot camp. I dual boot it with Snow Leopard. All seems to be working fine and has been since I set it up roughly 2 months ago.</p><p>However, I never did like the right-click support on the touch pad for Vista and it's no better in Windows 7. It acts rather odd in windows explorer. Otherwise a great machine. I rarely use the Mac OS, but it's nice to play with on occasion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm writing this from my MacBook running Windows7 via boot camp .
I dual boot it with Snow Leopard .
All seems to be working fine and has been since I set it up roughly 2 months ago.However , I never did like the right-click support on the touch pad for Vista and it 's no better in Windows 7 .
It acts rather odd in windows explorer .
Otherwise a great machine .
I rarely use the Mac OS , but it 's nice to play with on occasion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm writing this from my MacBook running Windows7 via boot camp.
I dual boot it with Snow Leopard.
All seems to be working fine and has been since I set it up roughly 2 months ago.However, I never did like the right-click support on the touch pad for Vista and it's no better in Windows 7.
It acts rather odd in windows explorer.
Otherwise a great machine.
I rarely use the Mac OS, but it's nice to play with on occasion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30625286</id>
	<title>Not true!</title>
	<author>zoso1132</author>
	<datestamp>1262465340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not true! My MBP runs Windows 7 Ultimate on BootCamp like a pro. No problems with drivers -- printing, mouse/keyboard control, audio, everything. Works like a charm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not true !
My MBP runs Windows 7 Ultimate on BootCamp like a pro .
No problems with drivers -- printing , mouse/keyboard control , audio , everything .
Works like a charm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not true!
My MBP runs Windows 7 Ultimate on BootCamp like a pro.
No problems with drivers -- printing, mouse/keyboard control, audio, everything.
Works like a charm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618822</id>
	<title>MAC HAS DISABLED WINDOWS 7 64 BIT IN OSX</title>
	<author>Latinhypercube</author>
	<datestamp>1262360100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Installing Windows 7 32 bit is trivial.
BUT, installing Windows 7 64 bit (the major difference in the new windows OS) has been made NEAR IMPOSSIBLE by Apple.
Perhaps Apple is worried about PRO clients swapping the osx to a decent 64 bit OS.
After many days, including having to REBUILD the windows 7 64bit installer AND delete a terminally incompatible driver in DOS during install,
we managed to get WIN 7 64bit running on a Mac Pro (1st version), even though Apple STATED THIS WAS IMPOSSIBLE AND WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTED...
Even though IT IS POSSIBLE, but not by using any Apple help.
And YES, Windows 7 64-bit kicks OSX's ass in every performance department on the same machine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Installing Windows 7 32 bit is trivial .
BUT , installing Windows 7 64 bit ( the major difference in the new windows OS ) has been made NEAR IMPOSSIBLE by Apple .
Perhaps Apple is worried about PRO clients swapping the osx to a decent 64 bit OS .
After many days , including having to REBUILD the windows 7 64bit installer AND delete a terminally incompatible driver in DOS during install , we managed to get WIN 7 64bit running on a Mac Pro ( 1st version ) , even though Apple STATED THIS WAS IMPOSSIBLE AND WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTED.. . Even though IT IS POSSIBLE , but not by using any Apple help .
And YES , Windows 7 64-bit kicks OSX 's ass in every performance department on the same machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Installing Windows 7 32 bit is trivial.
BUT, installing Windows 7 64 bit (the major difference in the new windows OS) has been made NEAR IMPOSSIBLE by Apple.
Perhaps Apple is worried about PRO clients swapping the osx to a decent 64 bit OS.
After many days, including having to REBUILD the windows 7 64bit installer AND delete a terminally incompatible driver in DOS during install,
we managed to get WIN 7 64bit running on a Mac Pro (1st version), even though Apple STATED THIS WAS IMPOSSIBLE AND WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTED...
Even though IT IS POSSIBLE, but not by using any Apple help.
And YES, Windows 7 64-bit kicks OSX's ass in every performance department on the same machine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617812</id>
	<title>Re:Virtualbox</title>
	<author>Movi</author>
	<datestamp>1262353860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems the developers of VMWare and Parallels are in disagreement with you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems the developers of VMWare and Parallels are in disagreement with you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems the developers of VMWare and Parallels are in disagreement with you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617536</id>
	<title>Re:Virtualbox</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1262352120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes they are.  VirtualBox has supported accelerated OpenGL in guests for ages and accelerated Direct3D for about a year.  It's (obviously) not as fast as native, but it does work (apparently - I only use VirtualBox for running FreeBSD).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes they are .
VirtualBox has supported accelerated OpenGL in guests for ages and accelerated Direct3D for about a year .
It 's ( obviously ) not as fast as native , but it does work ( apparently - I only use VirtualBox for running FreeBSD ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes they are.
VirtualBox has supported accelerated OpenGL in guests for ages and accelerated Direct3D for about a year.
It's (obviously) not as fast as native, but it does work (apparently - I only use VirtualBox for running FreeBSD).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618326</id>
	<title>Re:Apple Specific Drivers</title>
	<author>mattventura</author>
	<datestamp>1262356560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been using linux on a mac for ages. EFI isn't something like a peripheral that requires driver support. It is only enhanced with drivers. If I do not install the right modules on Linux, it works fine, but I can't set the fan speed and such. Drivers are only really needed for fine control. It's like if you install windows but you don't install any drivers. It will work, just not as well. But you definitely won't cause any <i>damage</i>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using linux on a mac for ages .
EFI is n't something like a peripheral that requires driver support .
It is only enhanced with drivers .
If I do not install the right modules on Linux , it works fine , but I ca n't set the fan speed and such .
Drivers are only really needed for fine control .
It 's like if you install windows but you do n't install any drivers .
It will work , just not as well .
But you definitely wo n't cause any damage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using linux on a mac for ages.
EFI isn't something like a peripheral that requires driver support.
It is only enhanced with drivers.
If I do not install the right modules on Linux, it works fine, but I can't set the fan speed and such.
Drivers are only really needed for fine control.
It's like if you install windows but you don't install any drivers.
It will work, just not as well.
But you definitely won't cause any damage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080</id>
	<title>Why bother?</title>
	<author>moderators\_are\_w*nke</author>
	<datestamp>1262348760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you wanted a Windows laptop why would you pay all that money?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you wanted a Windows laptop why would you pay all that money ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you wanted a Windows laptop why would you pay all that money?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618612</id>
	<title>I'm running on Windows 7 just fine...</title>
	<author>TechnoGrl</author>
	<datestamp>1262358720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everything works fine.  I used a third party partition manager to set up/move the partitions around and then used the bootcamp drivers.  Power savings could be better (2 hours under Win7 vs 6 hours in OS x) but aside from that nit it works just fine for me.</p><p>I'm not entirely sure what the issue is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everything works fine .
I used a third party partition manager to set up/move the partitions around and then used the bootcamp drivers .
Power savings could be better ( 2 hours under Win7 vs 6 hours in OS x ) but aside from that nit it works just fine for me.I 'm not entirely sure what the issue is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everything works fine.
I used a third party partition manager to set up/move the partitions around and then used the bootcamp drivers.
Power savings could be better (2 hours under Win7 vs 6 hours in OS x) but aside from that nit it works just fine for me.I'm not entirely sure what the issue is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30632064</id>
	<title>Re:OSX runs windows, Pystar runs OSX.</title>
	<author>tevita</author>
	<datestamp>1262538660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The basic premise is that Apple wish to tie their OS to Apple controlled hardware. Microsoft don't give a hoot about where their software is running as long as they have their licence fee. Apple get pissed if you run their OS on anything but their systems.</p><p>They both have their business models, they both adapt their licence agreements to suit their models.</p><p>What that has done it setup a situation where you own a Mac, you're able to get the best of both the Apple OSX and Windows environments (and whatever else you want, provided you have a licence). On the other hand if you run MS, you're not legally able to run OSX even through virtualization as you are not able to purchase the OS independent of the Hardware. (if I am wrong on this second count, then, yeah, OK, I'll admit, I missed something)</p><p>Apple are playing this to their advantage which does not create a level playing field. This is not in the spirit of fair competition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The basic premise is that Apple wish to tie their OS to Apple controlled hardware .
Microsoft do n't give a hoot about where their software is running as long as they have their licence fee .
Apple get pissed if you run their OS on anything but their systems.They both have their business models , they both adapt their licence agreements to suit their models.What that has done it setup a situation where you own a Mac , you 're able to get the best of both the Apple OSX and Windows environments ( and whatever else you want , provided you have a licence ) .
On the other hand if you run MS , you 're not legally able to run OSX even through virtualization as you are not able to purchase the OS independent of the Hardware .
( if I am wrong on this second count , then , yeah , OK , I 'll admit , I missed something ) Apple are playing this to their advantage which does not create a level playing field .
This is not in the spirit of fair competition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The basic premise is that Apple wish to tie their OS to Apple controlled hardware.
Microsoft don't give a hoot about where their software is running as long as they have their licence fee.
Apple get pissed if you run their OS on anything but their systems.They both have their business models, they both adapt their licence agreements to suit their models.What that has done it setup a situation where you own a Mac, you're able to get the best of both the Apple OSX and Windows environments (and whatever else you want, provided you have a licence).
On the other hand if you run MS, you're not legally able to run OSX even through virtualization as you are not able to purchase the OS independent of the Hardware.
(if I am wrong on this second count, then, yeah, OK, I'll admit, I missed something)Apple are playing this to their advantage which does not create a level playing field.
This is not in the spirit of fair competition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621056</id>
	<title>Re:Bootcamp a gimmick</title>
	<author>lxt</author>
	<datestamp>1262432520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For many companies it's way more than a gimmick - I work for a large university that *exclusively* provides Apple hardware for end-user computing. All staff and students use iMacs or MacBook Pros for day to day use. The hardware is solid, and the lifespan of a mac machine tends to be a couple of years beyond that of a PC.

Around half of those users choose to keep OS X on their personal machines we provide, and the others use Windows. So Boot Camp for us is really a big, big plus. If Apple didn't provide Boot Camp, they'd lose a lot of custom from institutions like ours.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For many companies it 's way more than a gimmick - I work for a large university that * exclusively * provides Apple hardware for end-user computing .
All staff and students use iMacs or MacBook Pros for day to day use .
The hardware is solid , and the lifespan of a mac machine tends to be a couple of years beyond that of a PC .
Around half of those users choose to keep OS X on their personal machines we provide , and the others use Windows .
So Boot Camp for us is really a big , big plus .
If Apple did n't provide Boot Camp , they 'd lose a lot of custom from institutions like ours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For many companies it's way more than a gimmick - I work for a large university that *exclusively* provides Apple hardware for end-user computing.
All staff and students use iMacs or MacBook Pros for day to day use.
The hardware is solid, and the lifespan of a mac machine tends to be a couple of years beyond that of a PC.
Around half of those users choose to keep OS X on their personal machines we provide, and the others use Windows.
So Boot Camp for us is really a big, big plus.
If Apple didn't provide Boot Camp, they'd lose a lot of custom from institutions like ours.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621640</id>
	<title>Re:Bootcamp a gimmick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262441580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I for one would and do purchase Apple hardware to exclusively run a Windows OS.  Back in 07 I took my wife laptop shopping.  We went to various stores and she test drove various models.  Eventually she decided on the MacBook because of the keyboard.  I then loaded it with Tiger (the recent Mac OS at the time) and BootCamp with Windows Vista for a week.  At the end of the week she determined she liked the hardware but preferred Windows XP.  After a wipe-n-reload she now uses Windows XP exclusively on her MacBook and she's happy.</p><p>At the end of the day she has what she wanted and that's all that matters to me.  The best hardware and OS per the person using the system.</p><p>I on the other hand like the Mac mini and purchased the Early-09 model this year.  I run Windows Vista on it exclusively.  It's a nice little piece of hardware that can run my dual monitors.  It's not a powerhouse with a Nahalem and more, but its great for what I use it for.</p><p>Yes, there are crazy people out there that purchase Apple hardware because its quality hardware and still don't run Apple's operating system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one would and do purchase Apple hardware to exclusively run a Windows OS .
Back in 07 I took my wife laptop shopping .
We went to various stores and she test drove various models .
Eventually she decided on the MacBook because of the keyboard .
I then loaded it with Tiger ( the recent Mac OS at the time ) and BootCamp with Windows Vista for a week .
At the end of the week she determined she liked the hardware but preferred Windows XP .
After a wipe-n-reload she now uses Windows XP exclusively on her MacBook and she 's happy.At the end of the day she has what she wanted and that 's all that matters to me .
The best hardware and OS per the person using the system.I on the other hand like the Mac mini and purchased the Early-09 model this year .
I run Windows Vista on it exclusively .
It 's a nice little piece of hardware that can run my dual monitors .
It 's not a powerhouse with a Nahalem and more , but its great for what I use it for.Yes , there are crazy people out there that purchase Apple hardware because its quality hardware and still do n't run Apple 's operating system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one would and do purchase Apple hardware to exclusively run a Windows OS.
Back in 07 I took my wife laptop shopping.
We went to various stores and she test drove various models.
Eventually she decided on the MacBook because of the keyboard.
I then loaded it with Tiger (the recent Mac OS at the time) and BootCamp with Windows Vista for a week.
At the end of the week she determined she liked the hardware but preferred Windows XP.
After a wipe-n-reload she now uses Windows XP exclusively on her MacBook and she's happy.At the end of the day she has what she wanted and that's all that matters to me.
The best hardware and OS per the person using the system.I on the other hand like the Mac mini and purchased the Early-09 model this year.
I run Windows Vista on it exclusively.
It's a nice little piece of hardware that can run my dual monitors.
It's not a powerhouse with a Nahalem and more, but its great for what I use it for.Yes, there are crazy people out there that purchase Apple hardware because its quality hardware and still don't run Apple's operating system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619992</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista drivers work fine</title>
	<author>cawpin</author>
	<datestamp>1262373480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed, I had the public beta on my Macbook Pro and now have Enterprise 64 bit running without any problems whatsoever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed , I had the public beta on my Macbook Pro and now have Enterprise 64 bit running without any problems whatsoever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed, I had the public beta on my Macbook Pro and now have Enterprise 64 bit running without any problems whatsoever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619132</id>
	<title>Win 7 works in bootcamp on my iMac</title>
	<author>purpleraison</author>
	<datestamp>1262363340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not a problem at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a problem at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a problem at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618204</id>
	<title>Re:Why do you eschew choice?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262355960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't eschew choice; I eschew carrying around a small box with a large price tag and a conspicuous "steal me" icon on the lid.</p><p>I also eschew the anemic power of laptops compared to desktops (where's my quad core already?) and so long as I'm compromising, I might as well save some money in the process.</p></div><p>http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834146613&amp;Tpk=lenovo\%20i7</p><p>No compromise needed. Better graphics than a Mac Book Pro, half the price, and quad core, with 8 virtual cores (i7).<br>$999 for a Geforce 240 i7 laptop ain't bad. I have one next to my quad core triple display desktop<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't eschew choice ; I eschew carrying around a small box with a large price tag and a conspicuous " steal me " icon on the lid.I also eschew the anemic power of laptops compared to desktops ( where 's my quad core already ?
) and so long as I 'm compromising , I might as well save some money in the process.http : //www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx ? Item = N82E16834146613&amp;Tpk = lenovo \ % 20i7No compromise needed .
Better graphics than a Mac Book Pro , half the price , and quad core , with 8 virtual cores ( i7 ) . $ 999 for a Geforce 240 i7 laptop ai n't bad .
I have one next to my quad core triple display desktop : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't eschew choice; I eschew carrying around a small box with a large price tag and a conspicuous "steal me" icon on the lid.I also eschew the anemic power of laptops compared to desktops (where's my quad core already?
) and so long as I'm compromising, I might as well save some money in the process.http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834146613&amp;Tpk=lenovo\%20i7No compromise needed.
Better graphics than a Mac Book Pro, half the price, and quad core, with 8 virtual cores (i7).$999 for a Geforce 240 i7 laptop ain't bad.
I have one next to my quad core triple display desktop :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617696</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30622156</id>
	<title>Re:uhhh...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262446920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They didn't specify the calendar. Chinese New Year!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They did n't specify the calendar .
Chinese New Year !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They didn't specify the calendar.
Chinese New Year!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617508</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30622246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30623760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30625688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30628318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30623732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30632064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30626862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30627622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30622106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30622156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619718
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30627500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30627656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_2247245_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617432
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617466
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617354
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30627656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617226
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617468
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618974
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619406
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618736
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30623732
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30622106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621780
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618884
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30632064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617100
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617398
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618774
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30623760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619718
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617194
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617696
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618204
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617442
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619412
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30626862
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619532
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618454
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619280
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30628318
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620818
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617878
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620970
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621512
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617352
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617536
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621810
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617498
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30625688
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617812
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617078
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30627622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30627500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621980
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30622156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619300
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30619136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30620128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_2247245.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621640
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30621056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30622246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30617384
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_2247245.30618142
</commentlist>
</conversation>
