<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_18_0254225</id>
	<title>HandBrake Abandons DivX As an Output Format</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1263828780000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"DivX was the first digital video format to really win mainstream acceptance, doing for movies what MP3 did for music (both good and bad). Eventually even Sony, the king of proprietary formats, caved into pressure and added DivX support to its DVD players and the PlayStation 3. Now HandBrake's developers have made an interesting choice for version 0.9.4 &mdash; they <a href="http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/164982,handbrake-abandons-divx-for-ripping-dvds-should-you.aspx">ditched support for AVI files using DivX and XviD</a>. Your only option now is to convert DVDs and other media to MKV or MP4 files, with the option to save as Apple-friendly M4V files. So why is HandBrake ditching AVI and XviD support when it's a format that's won such widespread acceptance? In the words of the developers, 'AVI is a rough beast. It is obsolete.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " DivX was the first digital video format to really win mainstream acceptance , doing for movies what MP3 did for music ( both good and bad ) .
Eventually even Sony , the king of proprietary formats , caved into pressure and added DivX support to its DVD players and the PlayStation 3 .
Now HandBrake 's developers have made an interesting choice for version 0.9.4    they ditched support for AVI files using DivX and XviD .
Your only option now is to convert DVDs and other media to MKV or MP4 files , with the option to save as Apple-friendly M4V files .
So why is HandBrake ditching AVI and XviD support when it 's a format that 's won such widespread acceptance ?
In the words of the developers , 'AVI is a rough beast .
It is obsolete .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "DivX was the first digital video format to really win mainstream acceptance, doing for movies what MP3 did for music (both good and bad).
Eventually even Sony, the king of proprietary formats, caved into pressure and added DivX support to its DVD players and the PlayStation 3.
Now HandBrake's developers have made an interesting choice for version 0.9.4 — they ditched support for AVI files using DivX and XviD.
Your only option now is to convert DVDs and other media to MKV or MP4 files, with the option to save as Apple-friendly M4V files.
So why is HandBrake ditching AVI and XviD support when it's a format that's won such widespread acceptance?
In the words of the developers, 'AVI is a rough beast.
It is obsolete.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805126</id>
	<title>xvid is less demanding</title>
	<author>auntieNeo</author>
	<datestamp>1263756420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Xvid and divx (mpeg-4 part 2) are far less resource-intensive than h.264. I don't know if anyone's ever tried playing a reasonably sized h.264 encoded video on a PIII, but it usually doesn't work out so well. Avi and divx I'm not so sure about, but I don't see why they had to get rid of xvid. Maybe I'm behind the times, but most of the time when I decide to re-encode something it's because I need to play it on a slow budget box like the ones they have at school.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Xvid and divx ( mpeg-4 part 2 ) are far less resource-intensive than h.264 .
I do n't know if anyone 's ever tried playing a reasonably sized h.264 encoded video on a PIII , but it usually does n't work out so well .
Avi and divx I 'm not so sure about , but I do n't see why they had to get rid of xvid .
Maybe I 'm behind the times , but most of the time when I decide to re-encode something it 's because I need to play it on a slow budget box like the ones they have at school .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xvid and divx (mpeg-4 part 2) are far less resource-intensive than h.264.
I don't know if anyone's ever tried playing a reasonably sized h.264 encoded video on a PIII, but it usually doesn't work out so well.
Avi and divx I'm not so sure about, but I don't see why they had to get rid of xvid.
Maybe I'm behind the times, but most of the time when I decide to re-encode something it's because I need to play it on a slow budget box like the ones they have at school.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804518</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>strstr</author>
	<datestamp>1263749520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows Media Player 12 (Win7) will play most MPEG4/AVC files, including XviD and DivX out of the box. I believe it's due out soon for previous versions of Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows Media Player 12 ( Win7 ) will play most MPEG4/AVC files , including XviD and DivX out of the box .
I believe it 's due out soon for previous versions of Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows Media Player 12 (Win7) will play most MPEG4/AVC files, including XviD and DivX out of the box.
I believe it's due out soon for previous versions of Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808520</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>Ltap</author>
	<datestamp>1263833400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here's a solution - HDMI-out. Use it. It eliminates all of the headaches that come from DVD players.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a solution - HDMI-out .
Use it .
It eliminates all of the headaches that come from DVD players .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a solution - HDMI-out.
Use it.
It eliminates all of the headaches that come from DVD players.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804330</id>
	<title>They removed ogg support too</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263747840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hello Firefox 3.5+ uses ogg for video tags you jackasses. Thanks handbrake, apple apologists.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hello Firefox 3.5 + uses ogg for video tags you jackasses .
Thanks handbrake , apple apologists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hello Firefox 3.5+ uses ogg for video tags you jackasses.
Thanks handbrake, apple apologists.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804920</id>
	<title>Good - As Should We All!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263754080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now if hardware designers would drop support for DirectX in favor of OpenGL, we would all benefit.</p><p>Screw DiVX, DirectX, anything bearing the stench of a proprietary nature. Drop them all at the curb and never look back.</p><p>This message sponsored by the: LOL, TOR ROX department of education.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now if hardware designers would drop support for DirectX in favor of OpenGL , we would all benefit.Screw DiVX , DirectX , anything bearing the stench of a proprietary nature .
Drop them all at the curb and never look back.This message sponsored by the : LOL , TOR ROX department of education .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now if hardware designers would drop support for DirectX in favor of OpenGL, we would all benefit.Screw DiVX, DirectX, anything bearing the stench of a proprietary nature.
Drop them all at the curb and never look back.This message sponsored by the: LOL, TOR ROX department of education.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804778</id>
	<title>you could say...</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1263752220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>.. they just put the brakes on their popularity</htmltext>
<tokenext>.. they just put the brakes on their popularity</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.. they just put the brakes on their popularity</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804172</id>
	<title>Full dev quote from TFA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263746580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"AVI is a rough beast. It is obsolete. It does not support modern container features like chapters, muxed-in subtitles, variable framerate video, or out of order frame display. Furthermore, HandBrake's AVI muxer is vanilla AVI 1.0 that doesn't even support large files. The code has not been actively maintained since 2005. Keeping it in the library while implementing new features means a very convoluted data pipeline, full of conditionals that make the code more difficult to read and maintain, and make output harder to predict. As such, it is now gone. It is not coming back, and good riddance."</p><p>"HandBrake, these days, is almost entirely about H.264 video, aka MPEG-4 Part 10. This makes it rather...superfluous to include two different encoders for an older codec, MPEG-4 Part 2. When choosing between FFmpeg's and XviD's, it came down to a matter of necessity. We need to include libavcodec (FFmpeg) for a bunch of other parts of its API, like decoding. Meanwhile, XviD's build system causes grief (it's the most common support query we get about compiling, after x264's requirement of yasm). Since we mainly use MPEG-4 Part 2 for testing/debugging, and recommend only H.264 for high quality encodes, XviD's undisputed quality edge over FFmpeg's encoder is inconsequential, while FFmpeg's speed edge over XviD is important to us."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" AVI is a rough beast .
It is obsolete .
It does not support modern container features like chapters , muxed-in subtitles , variable framerate video , or out of order frame display .
Furthermore , HandBrake 's AVI muxer is vanilla AVI 1.0 that does n't even support large files .
The code has not been actively maintained since 2005 .
Keeping it in the library while implementing new features means a very convoluted data pipeline , full of conditionals that make the code more difficult to read and maintain , and make output harder to predict .
As such , it is now gone .
It is not coming back , and good riddance .
" " HandBrake , these days , is almost entirely about H.264 video , aka MPEG-4 Part 10 .
This makes it rather...superfluous to include two different encoders for an older codec , MPEG-4 Part 2 .
When choosing between FFmpeg 's and XviD 's , it came down to a matter of necessity .
We need to include libavcodec ( FFmpeg ) for a bunch of other parts of its API , like decoding .
Meanwhile , XviD 's build system causes grief ( it 's the most common support query we get about compiling , after x264 's requirement of yasm ) .
Since we mainly use MPEG-4 Part 2 for testing/debugging , and recommend only H.264 for high quality encodes , XviD 's undisputed quality edge over FFmpeg 's encoder is inconsequential , while FFmpeg 's speed edge over XviD is important to us .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"AVI is a rough beast.
It is obsolete.
It does not support modern container features like chapters, muxed-in subtitles, variable framerate video, or out of order frame display.
Furthermore, HandBrake's AVI muxer is vanilla AVI 1.0 that doesn't even support large files.
The code has not been actively maintained since 2005.
Keeping it in the library while implementing new features means a very convoluted data pipeline, full of conditionals that make the code more difficult to read and maintain, and make output harder to predict.
As such, it is now gone.
It is not coming back, and good riddance.
""HandBrake, these days, is almost entirely about H.264 video, aka MPEG-4 Part 10.
This makes it rather...superfluous to include two different encoders for an older codec, MPEG-4 Part 2.
When choosing between FFmpeg's and XviD's, it came down to a matter of necessity.
We need to include libavcodec (FFmpeg) for a bunch of other parts of its API, like decoding.
Meanwhile, XviD's build system causes grief (it's the most common support query we get about compiling, after x264's requirement of yasm).
Since we mainly use MPEG-4 Part 2 for testing/debugging, and recommend only H.264 for high quality encodes, XviD's undisputed quality edge over FFmpeg's encoder is inconsequential, while FFmpeg's speed edge over XviD is important to us.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804570</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1263750060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I also like the fact that MKV containers can store multiple subtitles.  I have only used m4v and mrkv containers of late.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I also like the fact that MKV containers can store multiple subtitles .
I have only used m4v and mrkv containers of late .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also like the fact that MKV containers can store multiple subtitles.
I have only used m4v and mrkv containers of late.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804764</id>
	<title>Troll mod?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263752100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This post is insightful/interesting.  Why has it been modded down?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This post is insightful/interesting .
Why has it been modded down ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This post is insightful/interesting.
Why has it been modded down?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807236</id>
	<title>Unintended consequences</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263825840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess I'm some sort of niche but I've been using handbrake to convert all kinds of videos into a format suitable for Windows XP Celeron 300MHz machines in a school. This change means I'm not going to be upgrading my copy of Handbrake ever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess I 'm some sort of niche but I 've been using handbrake to convert all kinds of videos into a format suitable for Windows XP Celeron 300MHz machines in a school .
This change means I 'm not going to be upgrading my copy of Handbrake ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess I'm some sort of niche but I've been using handbrake to convert all kinds of videos into a format suitable for Windows XP Celeron 300MHz machines in a school.
This change means I'm not going to be upgrading my copy of Handbrake ever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807050</id>
	<title>I don't think anyone's mentioned this yet...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263824340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article says they are dropping support for avi and the Xvid encoder, you can still create MPEG-4/ASP files with the FFMPEG encoder and put them in mp4 files.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article says they are dropping support for avi and the Xvid encoder , you can still create MPEG-4/ASP files with the FFMPEG encoder and put them in mp4 files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article says they are dropping support for avi and the Xvid encoder, you can still create MPEG-4/ASP files with the FFMPEG encoder and put them in mp4 files.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804686</id>
	<title>Handbrake just dropped support for hw players...</title>
	<author>freaker\_TuC</author>
	<datestamp>1263751080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the best features about handbrake is, I could put in my DVD and have the copy on my mediaplayer.</p><p>Now; I'll need to use FFMPEG on handbrake input making the process double as long to support my 3yr old media player.</p><p>Oh, and it doesn't support MPEG that good without having issues. DivX was the savior for a long time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the best features about handbrake is , I could put in my DVD and have the copy on my mediaplayer.Now ; I 'll need to use FFMPEG on handbrake input making the process double as long to support my 3yr old media player.Oh , and it does n't support MPEG that good without having issues .
DivX was the savior for a long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the best features about handbrake is, I could put in my DVD and have the copy on my mediaplayer.Now; I'll need to use FFMPEG on handbrake input making the process double as long to support my 3yr old media player.Oh, and it doesn't support MPEG that good without having issues.
DivX was the savior for a long time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808758</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>audiofree</author>
	<datestamp>1263834960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 7 plays almost everything by defualt, h264, divx, xvid and even some types of movs out of the box.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 plays almost everything by defualt , h264 , divx , xvid and even some types of movs out of the box .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 plays almost everything by defualt, h264, divx, xvid and even some types of movs out of the box.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807606</id>
	<title>You can't make something obsolete...</title>
	<author>gregthebunny</author>
	<datestamp>1263828540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...just because you don't like it. You're not Microsoft, you know. <em>zing!</em></htmltext>
<tokenext>...just because you do n't like it .
You 're not Microsoft , you know .
zing !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...just because you don't like it.
You're not Microsoft, you know.
zing!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807584</id>
	<title>clearup</title>
	<author>kangsterizer</author>
	<datestamp>1263828420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From <a href="http://handbrake.fr/" title="handbrake.fr" rel="nofollow">http://handbrake.fr/</a> [handbrake.fr] (instead of linking to a loosy article):</p><p>- AVI container removed<br>- OGG/OGM codec removed<br>- XVID codec removed (in favor of FFMPEG)</p><p>but then again you don't have to use handbrake. its not about obsoleting for the better, its obsoleting cause they couldn't be bothered to include and test them.<br>one should still be able to encode whichever format he likes. you might have a player that only support AVI for example.<br>Fortunately, you do not *have* to use handbrake. Like, you know, there's other things too. Heck I still use VirtualDub just for encoding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From http : //handbrake.fr/ [ handbrake.fr ] ( instead of linking to a loosy article ) : - AVI container removed- OGG/OGM codec removed- XVID codec removed ( in favor of FFMPEG ) but then again you do n't have to use handbrake .
its not about obsoleting for the better , its obsoleting cause they could n't be bothered to include and test them.one should still be able to encode whichever format he likes .
you might have a player that only support AVI for example.Fortunately , you do not * have * to use handbrake .
Like , you know , there 's other things too .
Heck I still use VirtualDub just for encoding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From http://handbrake.fr/ [handbrake.fr] (instead of linking to a loosy article):- AVI container removed- OGG/OGM codec removed- XVID codec removed (in favor of FFMPEG)but then again you don't have to use handbrake.
its not about obsoleting for the better, its obsoleting cause they couldn't be bothered to include and test them.one should still be able to encode whichever format he likes.
you might have a player that only support AVI for example.Fortunately, you do not *have* to use handbrake.
Like, you know, there's other things too.
Heck I still use VirtualDub just for encoding.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804548</id>
	<title>Uh, DivX is switching to MKV</title>
	<author>strstr</author>
	<datestamp>1263749880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's a major lack of insight into this situation. DivX also hasn't ever inherintly meant AVI. AVI it's a standard Windows container format and DivX is something completely different, the data that can be stored inside the AVI format.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a major lack of insight into this situation .
DivX also has n't ever inherintly meant AVI .
AVI it 's a standard Windows container format and DivX is something completely different , the data that can be stored inside the AVI format .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a major lack of insight into this situation.
DivX also hasn't ever inherintly meant AVI.
AVI it's a standard Windows container format and DivX is something completely different, the data that can be stored inside the AVI format.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804616</id>
	<title>There are two types of formats....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263750480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... those that everyone complains about, and those that no one uses.</p><p>With apologies to Stroustrup.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... those that everyone complains about , and those that no one uses.With apologies to Stroustrup .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... those that everyone complains about, and those that no one uses.With apologies to Stroustrup.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</id>
	<title>Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>JakFrost</author>
	<datestamp>1263747660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">H.264/MPEG-4 AVC</a> [wikipedia.org] is <b>Mature</b>!  We have availability of fast and reliable open source <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X264" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">x264</a> [wikipedia.org] H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC encoder and the wide spread usage of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matroska" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Matroska (MKV)</a> [wikipedia.org] container files and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mp4" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">MPEG 4 (MP4)</a> [wikipedia.org] container files. Even some set-top boxes support playback of video and audio from both containers now and more are announced for this year.  There is also a demand now for HD content in both 720p an and 1080i/p formats H.264 is required to give reasonable file sizes versus XviD/DivX (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4\_ASP#Advanced\_Simple\_Profile\_.28ASP.29" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">MPEG-4 ASP</a> [wikipedia.org]).</p><p>Also <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio\_Video\_Interleave" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Audio Video Interleave (AVI)</a> [wikipedia.org] container files are problematic and have limitations since they don't allow the inclusion of chapters or subtitles, are not compatible with newer audio encoding formats such as AAC and lossless Dolby Digital or DTS audio formats, and don't work really well with some of the newer video formats.</p><p>It is time to move on from this old container format and also move away from older DivX and XviD (MPEG-4 ASP) formats onto the newer H.264 / MPEG-4 (x264) video encoding formats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because H.264/MPEG-4 AVC [ wikipedia.org ] is Mature !
We have availability of fast and reliable open source x264 [ wikipedia.org ] H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC encoder and the wide spread usage of Matroska ( MKV ) [ wikipedia.org ] container files and MPEG 4 ( MP4 ) [ wikipedia.org ] container files .
Even some set-top boxes support playback of video and audio from both containers now and more are announced for this year .
There is also a demand now for HD content in both 720p an and 1080i/p formats H.264 is required to give reasonable file sizes versus XviD/DivX ( MPEG-4 ASP [ wikipedia.org ] ) .Also Audio Video Interleave ( AVI ) [ wikipedia.org ] container files are problematic and have limitations since they do n't allow the inclusion of chapters or subtitles , are not compatible with newer audio encoding formats such as AAC and lossless Dolby Digital or DTS audio formats , and do n't work really well with some of the newer video formats.It is time to move on from this old container format and also move away from older DivX and XviD ( MPEG-4 ASP ) formats onto the newer H.264 / MPEG-4 ( x264 ) video encoding formats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because H.264/MPEG-4 AVC [wikipedia.org] is Mature!
We have availability of fast and reliable open source x264 [wikipedia.org] H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC encoder and the wide spread usage of Matroska (MKV) [wikipedia.org] container files and MPEG 4 (MP4) [wikipedia.org] container files.
Even some set-top boxes support playback of video and audio from both containers now and more are announced for this year.
There is also a demand now for HD content in both 720p an and 1080i/p formats H.264 is required to give reasonable file sizes versus XviD/DivX (MPEG-4 ASP [wikipedia.org]).Also Audio Video Interleave (AVI) [wikipedia.org] container files are problematic and have limitations since they don't allow the inclusion of chapters or subtitles, are not compatible with newer audio encoding formats such as AAC and lossless Dolby Digital or DTS audio formats, and don't work really well with some of the newer video formats.It is time to move on from this old container format and also move away from older DivX and XviD (MPEG-4 ASP) formats onto the newer H.264 / MPEG-4 (x264) video encoding formats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804190</id>
	<title>This is old news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263746760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Handbrake 0.9.4 was released November 23, 2009.</p><p>Just because PC Authority writes an article about something that happened 2 months ago doesn't mean you have to perpetuate it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Handbrake 0.9.4 was released November 23 , 2009.Just because PC Authority writes an article about something that happened 2 months ago does n't mean you have to perpetuate it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Handbrake 0.9.4 was released November 23, 2009.Just because PC Authority writes an article about something that happened 2 months ago doesn't mean you have to perpetuate it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806892</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>quadrox</author>
	<datestamp>1263823020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>uh wtf? VLC allows you to de the same, at least with [SHIFT]+[R.Arrow] and [R.Arrow] - I never tried with control, but I bet it works the same.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>uh wtf ?
VLC allows you to de the same , at least with [ SHIFT ] + [ R.Arrow ] and [ R.Arrow ] - I never tried with control , but I bet it works the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>uh wtf?
VLC allows you to de the same, at least with [SHIFT]+[R.Arrow] and [R.Arrow] - I never tried with control, but I bet it works the same.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804146</id>
	<title>HandBrake?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263746280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another software I never heard of shoots itself in the foot for no reason whatsoever.<br>I guess I'll stick with DVDx and mencoder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another software I never heard of shoots itself in the foot for no reason whatsoever.I guess I 'll stick with DVDx and mencoder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another software I never heard of shoots itself in the foot for no reason whatsoever.I guess I'll stick with DVDx and mencoder.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30856328</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264095000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.</p></div><p>Hmmm, never heard of a media PC huh?  Rip all your DVDs to h.264 store them in either a central network location or on an external drive (make sure you have backups either way) and you won't need that DVD player.  Access to your movies will be significantly faster and everyone will be happy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>h.264 might be incredible , but I have no way of playing it on my TV.Hmmm , never heard of a media PC huh ?
Rip all your DVDs to h.264 store them in either a central network location or on an external drive ( make sure you have backups either way ) and you wo n't need that DVD player .
Access to your movies will be significantly faster and everyone will be happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.Hmmm, never heard of a media PC huh?
Rip all your DVDs to h.264 store them in either a central network location or on an external drive (make sure you have backups either way) and you won't need that DVD player.
Access to your movies will be significantly faster and everyone will be happy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810288</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Grizzley9</author>
	<datestamp>1263841560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not just play the original DVD?</p><p>If you are ripping to h.264 you don't need to be using a DVD player.  Otherwise, use another program to make a copy of your DVD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not just play the original DVD ? If you are ripping to h.264 you do n't need to be using a DVD player .
Otherwise , use another program to make a copy of your DVD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not just play the original DVD?If you are ripping to h.264 you don't need to be using a DVD player.
Otherwise, use another program to make a copy of your DVD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806622</id>
	<title>Even Microsoft doesn't really support AVI anymore</title>
	<author>Wildfire Darkstar</author>
	<datestamp>1263820560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, you can still play back AVI containers in Windows, but Windows has been pushing WMV in its stead for <em>years</em> now, for better or for worse. Windows 7 comes with out-of-the-box support for MP4 containers, if I remember correctly, as well.</p><p>AVI has been a functionally dead container format for close to decade, in all honesty. It's survived in zombie form because the only alternatives were either too bogged down in proprietary fluff (ASF/WMV) or not user friendly enough to set up for most Windows and Mac users (MKV and MP4). It had its lifespan prolonged by hardware manufacturers like Sony, but its falling further and further behind the technology curve, and the trends seem to be behind MP4, even in the dedicated hardware market.</p><p>And as for DivX/Xvid (since TFA fails to grasp the difference between codec and container), well, that's much ado about nothing: HandBrake will still happily encode MPEG-4 Part 2/Xvid-compliant video. It's just eliminating the Xvid encoder itself in favor of FFmpeg. And if you're not familiar enough with the situation to recognize that how little difference this makes, chances are you probably aren't affected by the decision at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , you can still play back AVI containers in Windows , but Windows has been pushing WMV in its stead for years now , for better or for worse .
Windows 7 comes with out-of-the-box support for MP4 containers , if I remember correctly , as well.AVI has been a functionally dead container format for close to decade , in all honesty .
It 's survived in zombie form because the only alternatives were either too bogged down in proprietary fluff ( ASF/WMV ) or not user friendly enough to set up for most Windows and Mac users ( MKV and MP4 ) .
It had its lifespan prolonged by hardware manufacturers like Sony , but its falling further and further behind the technology curve , and the trends seem to be behind MP4 , even in the dedicated hardware market.And as for DivX/Xvid ( since TFA fails to grasp the difference between codec and container ) , well , that 's much ado about nothing : HandBrake will still happily encode MPEG-4 Part 2/Xvid-compliant video .
It 's just eliminating the Xvid encoder itself in favor of FFmpeg .
And if you 're not familiar enough with the situation to recognize that how little difference this makes , chances are you probably are n't affected by the decision at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, you can still play back AVI containers in Windows, but Windows has been pushing WMV in its stead for years now, for better or for worse.
Windows 7 comes with out-of-the-box support for MP4 containers, if I remember correctly, as well.AVI has been a functionally dead container format for close to decade, in all honesty.
It's survived in zombie form because the only alternatives were either too bogged down in proprietary fluff (ASF/WMV) or not user friendly enough to set up for most Windows and Mac users (MKV and MP4).
It had its lifespan prolonged by hardware manufacturers like Sony, but its falling further and further behind the technology curve, and the trends seem to be behind MP4, even in the dedicated hardware market.And as for DivX/Xvid (since TFA fails to grasp the difference between codec and container), well, that's much ado about nothing: HandBrake will still happily encode MPEG-4 Part 2/Xvid-compliant video.
It's just eliminating the Xvid encoder itself in favor of FFmpeg.
And if you're not familiar enough with the situation to recognize that how little difference this makes, chances are you probably aren't affected by the decision at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807546</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>mrboyd</author>
	<datestamp>1263828300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows 7 does. It was long overdue but now it's "out of the box".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 does .
It was long overdue but now it 's " out of the box " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 does.
It was long overdue but now it's "out of the box".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804312</id>
	<title>"As a output format"</title>
	<author>johncandale</author>
	<datestamp>1263747780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Story is not completely clear, at points saying dropping support completely.   Which is a bad idea,  Handbrake is just a transcoder, the more formats it has, the better.  Only in dreamland does will the whole world pick one or even just a few formats.  So frustrating to get a video file and realize the Solika encoders picked a seemingly obscure codac that your editor/writer can't handle, being assured that the codac is faster, better and smaller isn't much of a consolation <p>
Dropping it as just a output formant is a little different.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Story is not completely clear , at points saying dropping support completely .
Which is a bad idea , Handbrake is just a transcoder , the more formats it has , the better .
Only in dreamland does will the whole world pick one or even just a few formats .
So frustrating to get a video file and realize the Solika encoders picked a seemingly obscure codac that your editor/writer ca n't handle , being assured that the codac is faster , better and smaller is n't much of a consolation Dropping it as just a output formant is a little different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Story is not completely clear, at points saying dropping support completely.
Which is a bad idea,  Handbrake is just a transcoder, the more formats it has, the better.
Only in dreamland does will the whole world pick one or even just a few formats.
So frustrating to get a video file and realize the Solika encoders picked a seemingly obscure codac that your editor/writer can't handle, being assured that the codac is faster, better and smaller isn't much of a consolation 
Dropping it as just a output formant is a little different.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806222</id>
	<title>Reality is Outdated.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263815580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These fine fellows have excluded, isolated, themselves from the trouble of making something for the real world. They must be aspiring to Dictatorial power similar to that of former M(onolithic behemoth)S. Or, have realised their limitations and decided to concentrate effort on the very narrow (but flashy) niche of the stylishly up-to-date.</p><p>The world is 80\% 'rather poor'. Legacy hardware is still, usually, vital and practically unreplaceable. That means that the spectrum of technology use (or base<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:p ), in  the real world, is rather wide and with considerable redshift. Including Anglic America and Western Europe. </p><p>My video-editing mementoes go to family and friends. <br>Most of them don't watch video on computers. <br>And their DVD players are usually *rather* antique.<br>*I'm* practically an antique myself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These fine fellows have excluded , isolated , themselves from the trouble of making something for the real world .
They must be aspiring to Dictatorial power similar to that of former M ( onolithic behemoth ) S. Or , have realised their limitations and decided to concentrate effort on the very narrow ( but flashy ) niche of the stylishly up-to-date.The world is 80 \ % 'rather poor' .
Legacy hardware is still , usually , vital and practically unreplaceable .
That means that the spectrum of technology use ( or base : p ) , in the real world , is rather wide and with considerable redshift .
Including Anglic America and Western Europe .
My video-editing mementoes go to family and friends .
Most of them do n't watch video on computers .
And their DVD players are usually * rather * antique .
* I 'm * practically an antique myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These fine fellows have excluded, isolated, themselves from the trouble of making something for the real world.
They must be aspiring to Dictatorial power similar to that of former M(onolithic behemoth)S. Or, have realised their limitations and decided to concentrate effort on the very narrow (but flashy) niche of the stylishly up-to-date.The world is 80\% 'rather poor'.
Legacy hardware is still, usually, vital and practically unreplaceable.
That means that the spectrum of technology use (or base :p ), in  the real world, is rather wide and with considerable redshift.
Including Anglic America and Western Europe.
My video-editing mementoes go to family and friends.
Most of them don't watch video on computers.
And their DVD players are usually *rather* antique.
*I'm* practically an antique myself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808116</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263831120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 7 does it. You don't need to install a player/codec anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 does it .
You do n't need to install a player/codec anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 does it.
You don't need to install a player/codec anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806088</id>
	<title>Handbrake Devs are douchebags anyways...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263814020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I just wanted to let you know that the devs on this project are the biggest douchebags you are likely to encounter.</p><p>Go read any thread on the forum, or this one: http://forum.handbrake.fr/viewtopic.php?f=23&amp;t=13269</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I just wanted to let you know that the devs on this project are the biggest douchebags you are likely to encounter.Go read any thread on the forum , or this one : http : //forum.handbrake.fr/viewtopic.php ? f = 23&amp;t = 13269</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I just wanted to let you know that the devs on this project are the biggest douchebags you are likely to encounter.Go read any thread on the forum, or this one: http://forum.handbrake.fr/viewtopic.php?f=23&amp;t=13269</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807204</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>CubicleView</author>
	<datestamp>1263825600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use vlc mostly just to play iso images, and i agree the UI seems a bit unpolished, but I find it refreshing that it does not try to create some craptacular media library any time I just want to create a playlist. My mp3's etc have shitty incomplete tags, there are too many and they are too crap for me to bother with attempting to correct them now. They are arranged by folder and that suits me just fine. I'm sure I've missed some settings in wmp, but out of the box at least it constantly wants me to let it trawl through hundreds of gigs worth of data looking for media to catalog by shitty mp3 tag.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use vlc mostly just to play iso images , and i agree the UI seems a bit unpolished , but I find it refreshing that it does not try to create some craptacular media library any time I just want to create a playlist .
My mp3 's etc have shitty incomplete tags , there are too many and they are too crap for me to bother with attempting to correct them now .
They are arranged by folder and that suits me just fine .
I 'm sure I 've missed some settings in wmp , but out of the box at least it constantly wants me to let it trawl through hundreds of gigs worth of data looking for media to catalog by shitty mp3 tag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use vlc mostly just to play iso images, and i agree the UI seems a bit unpolished, but I find it refreshing that it does not try to create some craptacular media library any time I just want to create a playlist.
My mp3's etc have shitty incomplete tags, there are too many and they are too crap for me to bother with attempting to correct them now.
They are arranged by folder and that suits me just fine.
I'm sure I've missed some settings in wmp, but out of the box at least it constantly wants me to let it trawl through hundreds of gigs worth of data looking for media to catalog by shitty mp3 tag.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804576</id>
	<title>Linux is obsolete too.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263750180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.educ.umu.se/~bjorn/mhonarc-files/obsolete/" title="educ.umu.se" rel="nofollow">But that didn't stop it</a> [educ.umu.se]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But that did n't stop it [ educ.umu.se ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But that didn't stop it [educ.umu.se]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804654</id>
	<title>Re:Ummm, what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263750900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Xvid however is <b>not</b> a proprietary format.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Xvid however is not a proprietary format .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xvid however is not a proprietary format.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807228</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Rockoon</author>
	<datestamp>1263825780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My beef with VLC is that there are many H264 shoutcast video streams that it fails to play correctly. Specifically the stream will pause/skip every few seconds and no amount of tweaking seems to be able to fix it, and its not a bandwidth/buffering issue because WinAmp plays these same streams just fine for hours without even a single instance of the phenomena.<br>
<br>
For awhile I was suspecting that maybe my computers clock ran slow or fast or something, causing the issue.. I tried to produce experimental evidence to support this theory but failed to do so. Specifically the PIT, HPET, and RDTSC (on each core) all agreed about the time to well within a tolerance that made the theory implausible.<br>
<br>
So my conclusion is that there is something fundamentally wrong with VLC's shoutcast+H264 streaming playback.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My beef with VLC is that there are many H264 shoutcast video streams that it fails to play correctly .
Specifically the stream will pause/skip every few seconds and no amount of tweaking seems to be able to fix it , and its not a bandwidth/buffering issue because WinAmp plays these same streams just fine for hours without even a single instance of the phenomena .
For awhile I was suspecting that maybe my computers clock ran slow or fast or something , causing the issue.. I tried to produce experimental evidence to support this theory but failed to do so .
Specifically the PIT , HPET , and RDTSC ( on each core ) all agreed about the time to well within a tolerance that made the theory implausible .
So my conclusion is that there is something fundamentally wrong with VLC 's shoutcast + H264 streaming playback .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My beef with VLC is that there are many H264 shoutcast video streams that it fails to play correctly.
Specifically the stream will pause/skip every few seconds and no amount of tweaking seems to be able to fix it, and its not a bandwidth/buffering issue because WinAmp plays these same streams just fine for hours without even a single instance of the phenomena.
For awhile I was suspecting that maybe my computers clock ran slow or fast or something, causing the issue.. I tried to produce experimental evidence to support this theory but failed to do so.
Specifically the PIT, HPET, and RDTSC (on each core) all agreed about the time to well within a tolerance that made the theory implausible.
So my conclusion is that there is something fundamentally wrong with VLC's shoutcast+H264 streaming playback.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804424</id>
	<title>Now it needs .m2ts support</title>
	<author>YesIAmAScript</author>
	<datestamp>1263748680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>mkv is a great format, but it isn't supported by Windows 7, Mac OS X (Quicktime), 360 or PS3.</p><p>I can however play an H.264/AC-3<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.m2ts file on Windows 7 and PS3. Maybe Mac OS X too, I'm not sure (my Mac is too slow for HD video anyway).</p><p>Because of this I end up converting virtually all my<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mkvs to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.2mts files (using TSMuxer) and throwing the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mkvs away. I can stream them to my PS3 for viewing on my TV or watch them in VLC on my Mac or VLC or Windows Media Player on my Windows PC.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.m2ts is a very capable format, I wish more people would use it.</p><p>And on the main topic, I'm so over AVI. Only with extensions can it support files large enough for HD movies, and then the playback compatibility drops through the floor anyway.<br>And H.264 is so good it almost baffles me.</p><p>XVid was key when we were watching SD content on hacked (original) Xboxes. That was a long time ago now. It's time to move on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>mkv is a great format , but it is n't supported by Windows 7 , Mac OS X ( Quicktime ) , 360 or PS3.I can however play an H.264/AC-3 .m2ts file on Windows 7 and PS3 .
Maybe Mac OS X too , I 'm not sure ( my Mac is too slow for HD video anyway ) .Because of this I end up converting virtually all my .mkvs to .2mts files ( using TSMuxer ) and throwing the .mkvs away .
I can stream them to my PS3 for viewing on my TV or watch them in VLC on my Mac or VLC or Windows Media Player on my Windows PC .
.m2ts is a very capable format , I wish more people would use it.And on the main topic , I 'm so over AVI .
Only with extensions can it support files large enough for HD movies , and then the playback compatibility drops through the floor anyway.And H.264 is so good it almost baffles me.XVid was key when we were watching SD content on hacked ( original ) Xboxes .
That was a long time ago now .
It 's time to move on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mkv is a great format, but it isn't supported by Windows 7, Mac OS X (Quicktime), 360 or PS3.I can however play an H.264/AC-3 .m2ts file on Windows 7 and PS3.
Maybe Mac OS X too, I'm not sure (my Mac is too slow for HD video anyway).Because of this I end up converting virtually all my .mkvs to .2mts files (using TSMuxer) and throwing the .mkvs away.
I can stream them to my PS3 for viewing on my TV or watch them in VLC on my Mac or VLC or Windows Media Player on my Windows PC.
.m2ts is a very capable format, I wish more people would use it.And on the main topic, I'm so over AVI.
Only with extensions can it support files large enough for HD movies, and then the playback compatibility drops through the floor anyway.And H.264 is so good it almost baffles me.XVid was key when we were watching SD content on hacked (original) Xboxes.
That was a long time ago now.
It's time to move on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807560</id>
	<title>What a misleading heading</title>
	<author>bdraw</author>
	<datestamp>1263828300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Handbrake is abandoning the container avi which yes, DivX supports, but DivX also uses the MKV container which is still supported by Handbrake. It is confusing I know, but if you are going to write for Slashdot you had better be able to keep up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Handbrake is abandoning the container avi which yes , DivX supports , but DivX also uses the MKV container which is still supported by Handbrake .
It is confusing I know , but if you are going to write for Slashdot you had better be able to keep up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Handbrake is abandoning the container avi which yes, DivX supports, but DivX also uses the MKV container which is still supported by Handbrake.
It is confusing I know, but if you are going to write for Slashdot you had better be able to keep up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808360</id>
	<title>Isn't stupid devices the real problem?</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1263832560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So again, for so many people who own <b>DivX devices</b></p> </div><p>Isn't that the real problem: that we buy devices that easily could be reprogrammable, but aren't?</p><p>Yes, watching software-decoded video on your phone is going to be a bitch, especially on the battery life.  But bitchy is better than impossible.</p><p>Yeah, it sucks having to spend your afternoon upgrading your wii homebrew linux installation to the newest version and fixing the things that don't work.  But it's better to do that and have a working media center than not, right?</p><p>Then again, most people don't want the same as me.  Why don't people want smart computers with stupid screens, speakers and NICs, instead of the other way around?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So again , for so many people who own DivX devices Is n't that the real problem : that we buy devices that easily could be reprogrammable , but are n't ? Yes , watching software-decoded video on your phone is going to be a bitch , especially on the battery life .
But bitchy is better than impossible.Yeah , it sucks having to spend your afternoon upgrading your wii homebrew linux installation to the newest version and fixing the things that do n't work .
But it 's better to do that and have a working media center than not , right ? Then again , most people do n't want the same as me .
Why do n't people want smart computers with stupid screens , speakers and NICs , instead of the other way around ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So again, for so many people who own DivX devices Isn't that the real problem: that we buy devices that easily could be reprogrammable, but aren't?Yes, watching software-decoded video on your phone is going to be a bitch, especially on the battery life.
But bitchy is better than impossible.Yeah, it sucks having to spend your afternoon upgrading your wii homebrew linux installation to the newest version and fixing the things that don't work.
But it's better to do that and have a working media center than not, right?Then again, most people don't want the same as me.
Why don't people want smart computers with stupid screens, speakers and NICs, instead of the other way around?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808464</id>
	<title>Re:Sense Of Perspective</title>
	<author>Jiro</author>
	<datestamp>1263833040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have yet to see a hardware player that plays Xvid 3 warp point GMC.</p><p>Exactly what 3 warp point GMC is is unimportant, except that divx doesn't have it and it takes a lot of CPU to decode by hardware player standards (it's nothing for a PC, of course), and lots of anime fansubs use that format.</p><p>So far the only "hardware" solution I know of to play these is to use a game console--a hacked Xbox or Wii with an open source player will do it, and I assume the standard players for PS3 or Xbox 360 will do it (never tried one).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have yet to see a hardware player that plays Xvid 3 warp point GMC.Exactly what 3 warp point GMC is is unimportant , except that divx does n't have it and it takes a lot of CPU to decode by hardware player standards ( it 's nothing for a PC , of course ) , and lots of anime fansubs use that format.So far the only " hardware " solution I know of to play these is to use a game console--a hacked Xbox or Wii with an open source player will do it , and I assume the standard players for PS3 or Xbox 360 will do it ( never tried one ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have yet to see a hardware player that plays Xvid 3 warp point GMC.Exactly what 3 warp point GMC is is unimportant, except that divx doesn't have it and it takes a lot of CPU to decode by hardware player standards (it's nothing for a PC, of course), and lots of anime fansubs use that format.So far the only "hardware" solution I know of to play these is to use a game console--a hacked Xbox or Wii with an open source player will do it, and I assume the standard players for PS3 or Xbox 360 will do it (never tried one).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805902</id>
	<title>Re:0.9.3</title>
	<author>Yaur</author>
	<datestamp>1263811800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>AVI was showing its age in 2000/2001 when streaming and large file support started to be important... it only lasted this long because it took ages for a relativity open container that wasn't even more broken than AVI to emerge.</htmltext>
<tokenext>AVI was showing its age in 2000/2001 when streaming and large file support started to be important... it only lasted this long because it took ages for a relativity open container that was n't even more broken than AVI to emerge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AVI was showing its age in 2000/2001 when streaming and large file support started to be important... it only lasted this long because it took ages for a relativity open container that wasn't even more broken than AVI to emerge.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804434</id>
	<title>Re:They don't like supporting it</title>
	<author>nxtw</author>
	<datestamp>1263748740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> They go on to explain that DivX quality isn't as good either. I am not sure if that is true or not</p></div></blockquote><p>The program never supported DivX to begin with; it used XviD.  And MPEG-4 Part 2 (the standard XviD implements) is known to be inferior to H.264/MPEG-4 Part 10.  H.264 is much more widely used than MPEG-4 Part 2 - in satellite TV, videoconferencing, Blu-ray, etc.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They go on to explain that DivX quality is n't as good either .
I am not sure if that is true or notThe program never supported DivX to begin with ; it used XviD .
And MPEG-4 Part 2 ( the standard XviD implements ) is known to be inferior to H.264/MPEG-4 Part 10 .
H.264 is much more widely used than MPEG-4 Part 2 - in satellite TV , videoconferencing , Blu-ray , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> They go on to explain that DivX quality isn't as good either.
I am not sure if that is true or notThe program never supported DivX to begin with; it used XviD.
And MPEG-4 Part 2 (the standard XviD implements) is known to be inferior to H.264/MPEG-4 Part 10.
H.264 is much more widely used than MPEG-4 Part 2 - in satellite TV, videoconferencing, Blu-ray, etc.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804950</id>
	<title>DivX, Xvid...avi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263754440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>handbrake sucks for those formats anyway. use autogk instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>handbrake sucks for those formats anyway .
use autogk instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>handbrake sucks for those formats anyway.
use autogk instead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804590</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263750300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 7 natively supports DivX, Xvid, MKV and H.264</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 natively supports DivX , Xvid , MKV and H.264</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 natively supports DivX, Xvid, MKV and H.264</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805548</id>
	<title>Didn't know about it before</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263805680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't know about handbrake before.  Just sucked down the source and built it (ubuntu 9.10).  Damn!  It runs like a champ.  On a corei7-920 it spits out a 115 minute film in 37 minutes (roughly quad speed).<br>I just uncompressed the source (tar -xjpvf HandBrake-0.9.4.tar.gz2) and then ran this:<br>#!/bin/bash<br>apt-get install subversion yasm build-essential autoconf libtool zlib1g-dev libbz2-dev intltool libglib2.0-dev libdbus-glib-1-dev libgtk2.0-dev libhal-dev libhal-storage-dev libwebkit-dev libnotify-dev libgstreamer0.10-dev libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-dev<br>cd HandBrake-0.9.4<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./configure --launch<br>cd build<br>make clean<br>make -j 16<br>make install<br>make doc<br># For Testing<br>ghb<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and the thing goes like a house on fire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't know about handbrake before .
Just sucked down the source and built it ( ubuntu 9.10 ) .
Damn ! It runs like a champ .
On a corei7-920 it spits out a 115 minute film in 37 minutes ( roughly quad speed ) .I just uncompressed the source ( tar -xjpvf HandBrake-0.9.4.tar.gz2 ) and then ran this : # ! /bin/bashapt-get install subversion yasm build-essential autoconf libtool zlib1g-dev libbz2-dev intltool libglib2.0-dev libdbus-glib-1-dev libgtk2.0-dev libhal-dev libhal-storage-dev libwebkit-dev libnotify-dev libgstreamer0.10-dev libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-devcd HandBrake-0.9.4 ./configure --launchcd buildmake cleanmake -j 16make installmake doc # For Testingghb ...and the thing goes like a house on fire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't know about handbrake before.
Just sucked down the source and built it (ubuntu 9.10).
Damn!  It runs like a champ.
On a corei7-920 it spits out a 115 minute film in 37 minutes (roughly quad speed).I just uncompressed the source (tar -xjpvf HandBrake-0.9.4.tar.gz2) and then ran this:#!/bin/bashapt-get install subversion yasm build-essential autoconf libtool zlib1g-dev libbz2-dev intltool libglib2.0-dev libdbus-glib-1-dev libgtk2.0-dev libhal-dev libhal-storage-dev libwebkit-dev libnotify-dev libgstreamer0.10-dev libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-devcd HandBrake-0.9.4 ./configure --launchcd buildmake cleanmake -j 16make installmake doc# For Testingghb ...and the thing goes like a house on fire.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884</id>
	<title>Sense Of Perspective</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1263753480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are hundreds of millions of consumer elctronics devices on the market that can play DivX. Many on them, including my Phillips DVD player, will also play Xvid without additional conversion. Besides having DivX conversion software, I have other converters that will handle pretty much everything going and coming, including the 'proprietary' DivX. DivX is signing up corporation after corporation to carry DivX compatibility on board <a href="http://investors.divx.com/search.cfm?keyword=certified" title="divx.com">http://investors.divx.com/search.cfm?keyword=certified</a> [divx.com] DivX saw the need for an extended file format and chose MKV. That's been added to their latest version. The response has been less than stellar. It apparently solves a problem that most people don't have. DivX apparently does, and anyone that doesn't care for the 'proprietary' aspect gets most of that functionality and less money shelled out via Xvid.</p><p>Just a quick look through the latest 100 movie file on TPB show 1 MKV, 1 MP4, 98 AVI.</p><p>So why should I listen to this Handbrake? What protocol have they developed? Oh, none. So what did they develop? The ability to use other peoples' protocols? I see. Well, I imagine doing that comes with some understanding of those other formats. So why haven't I heard about them before now? I seem to have done just fine without having heard about them before. Maybe more to the point, why am I only hearing about them now? Slashdotvertising? In any case, 'obsolete' is a strange thing to call 98\% (by my simple straw poll) acceptance, unless one is using it in the sense that the marketoids do: "it means I want you to use what I say based on what I say about something else, betting on the fact that you don't know shit about any of it except that you wouldn't be caught dead using anything but the newest bestest thing. Which we will tell you when it comes available. Like we did last time." If I hear anymore about Handbrake I suspect it'll be this same message, until they just stop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are hundreds of millions of consumer elctronics devices on the market that can play DivX .
Many on them , including my Phillips DVD player , will also play Xvid without additional conversion .
Besides having DivX conversion software , I have other converters that will handle pretty much everything going and coming , including the 'proprietary ' DivX .
DivX is signing up corporation after corporation to carry DivX compatibility on board http : //investors.divx.com/search.cfm ? keyword = certified [ divx.com ] DivX saw the need for an extended file format and chose MKV .
That 's been added to their latest version .
The response has been less than stellar .
It apparently solves a problem that most people do n't have .
DivX apparently does , and anyone that does n't care for the 'proprietary ' aspect gets most of that functionality and less money shelled out via Xvid.Just a quick look through the latest 100 movie file on TPB show 1 MKV , 1 MP4 , 98 AVI.So why should I listen to this Handbrake ?
What protocol have they developed ?
Oh , none .
So what did they develop ?
The ability to use other peoples ' protocols ?
I see .
Well , I imagine doing that comes with some understanding of those other formats .
So why have n't I heard about them before now ?
I seem to have done just fine without having heard about them before .
Maybe more to the point , why am I only hearing about them now ?
Slashdotvertising ? In any case , 'obsolete ' is a strange thing to call 98 \ % ( by my simple straw poll ) acceptance , unless one is using it in the sense that the marketoids do : " it means I want you to use what I say based on what I say about something else , betting on the fact that you do n't know shit about any of it except that you would n't be caught dead using anything but the newest bestest thing .
Which we will tell you when it comes available .
Like we did last time .
" If I hear anymore about Handbrake I suspect it 'll be this same message , until they just stop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are hundreds of millions of consumer elctronics devices on the market that can play DivX.
Many on them, including my Phillips DVD player, will also play Xvid without additional conversion.
Besides having DivX conversion software, I have other converters that will handle pretty much everything going and coming, including the 'proprietary' DivX.
DivX is signing up corporation after corporation to carry DivX compatibility on board http://investors.divx.com/search.cfm?keyword=certified [divx.com] DivX saw the need for an extended file format and chose MKV.
That's been added to their latest version.
The response has been less than stellar.
It apparently solves a problem that most people don't have.
DivX apparently does, and anyone that doesn't care for the 'proprietary' aspect gets most of that functionality and less money shelled out via Xvid.Just a quick look through the latest 100 movie file on TPB show 1 MKV, 1 MP4, 98 AVI.So why should I listen to this Handbrake?
What protocol have they developed?
Oh, none.
So what did they develop?
The ability to use other peoples' protocols?
I see.
Well, I imagine doing that comes with some understanding of those other formats.
So why haven't I heard about them before now?
I seem to have done just fine without having heard about them before.
Maybe more to the point, why am I only hearing about them now?
Slashdotvertising? In any case, 'obsolete' is a strange thing to call 98\% (by my simple straw poll) acceptance, unless one is using it in the sense that the marketoids do: "it means I want you to use what I say based on what I say about something else, betting on the fact that you don't know shit about any of it except that you wouldn't be caught dead using anything but the newest bestest thing.
Which we will tell you when it comes available.
Like we did last time.
" If I hear anymore about Handbrake I suspect it'll be this same message, until they just stop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805600</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Boibo</author>
	<datestamp>1263806760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Windows doesn't play DivX or XviD files by default.  To my knowledge, Handbrake never encoded files that Windows would play without installing an extra player or codec.</p></div><p>Windows 7 has support for divx/xvid now aswell as newer formats like mp4/h264 and even x264 but for mayority of those you need haali media splitter but the video in it self is supported AND accelerated (by the videocard if you got one that support DXVA)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows does n't play DivX or XviD files by default .
To my knowledge , Handbrake never encoded files that Windows would play without installing an extra player or codec.Windows 7 has support for divx/xvid now aswell as newer formats like mp4/h264 and even x264 but for mayority of those you need haali media splitter but the video in it self is supported AND accelerated ( by the videocard if you got one that support DXVA )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows doesn't play DivX or XviD files by default.
To my knowledge, Handbrake never encoded files that Windows would play without installing an extra player or codec.Windows 7 has support for divx/xvid now aswell as newer formats like mp4/h264 and even x264 but for mayority of those you need haali media splitter but the video in it self is supported AND accelerated (by the videocard if you got one that support DXVA)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804646</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1263750780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But we don't have any proper tools to work with them, only a few ultra nerdware ports. Until then naff off with your weird formats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But we do n't have any proper tools to work with them , only a few ultra nerdware ports .
Until then naff off with your weird formats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But we don't have any proper tools to work with them, only a few ultra nerdware ports.
Until then naff off with your weird formats.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804792</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>amiga3D</author>
	<datestamp>1263752400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mac users should install VLC.  I just upgraded vlc on my ibook G4 and the latest (leopard or above only) version of vlc made files play smoothly on my system that were choppy with vlc before and wouldn't play in anything else.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac users should install VLC .
I just upgraded vlc on my ibook G4 and the latest ( leopard or above only ) version of vlc made files play smoothly on my system that were choppy with vlc before and would n't play in anything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac users should install VLC.
I just upgraded vlc on my ibook G4 and the latest (leopard or above only) version of vlc made files play smoothly on my system that were choppy with vlc before and wouldn't play in anything else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805028</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263755340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That wasn't what TheSHADOW was talking about...AVI and DIVX both have LOADS of support on the Web, and are supported by dozens of players (see nxtw's response below). I personally won't be using the new version of Handbrake because I have (and will buy more of) DIVX-enabled DVD players to play back my media on my TV. Handbrake devs need to take their heads out of their collective asses and see this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was n't what TheSHADOW was talking about...AVI and DIVX both have LOADS of support on the Web , and are supported by dozens of players ( see nxtw 's response below ) .
I personally wo n't be using the new version of Handbrake because I have ( and will buy more of ) DIVX-enabled DVD players to play back my media on my TV .
Handbrake devs need to take their heads out of their collective asses and see this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That wasn't what TheSHADOW was talking about...AVI and DIVX both have LOADS of support on the Web, and are supported by dozens of players (see nxtw's response below).
I personally won't be using the new version of Handbrake because I have (and will buy more of) DIVX-enabled DVD players to play back my media on my TV.
Handbrake devs need to take their heads out of their collective asses and see this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804980</id>
	<title>Not gonna help</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263754740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anybody who still uses ASP codecs by now is a helpless case. I can understand using Theora because it's free, but there's no reason for DivX/XviD anymore. They have been obsolete for years. Yet most movies are still released as XviD in spite of the fact that x264 has double the quality per bitrate. The "scene" will never learn.</p><p>To add a shameless plug, if you're on Windows looking for a transcoding frontend, try Staxrip. It's a breeze.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anybody who still uses ASP codecs by now is a helpless case .
I can understand using Theora because it 's free , but there 's no reason for DivX/XviD anymore .
They have been obsolete for years .
Yet most movies are still released as XviD in spite of the fact that x264 has double the quality per bitrate .
The " scene " will never learn.To add a shameless plug , if you 're on Windows looking for a transcoding frontend , try Staxrip .
It 's a breeze .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anybody who still uses ASP codecs by now is a helpless case.
I can understand using Theora because it's free, but there's no reason for DivX/XviD anymore.
They have been obsolete for years.
Yet most movies are still released as XviD in spite of the fact that x264 has double the quality per bitrate.
The "scene" will never learn.To add a shameless plug, if you're on Windows looking for a transcoding frontend, try Staxrip.
It's a breeze.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805780</id>
	<title>Re:Time synch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263809940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Mp3 has left me very disappointed in movies so far. (probably the extreme dynamic range compression)</p></div><p>The dynamic range won't be compressed unless the video conversion application you are using is configured to do so. Dynamic range compression is a signal processing step done *before* MP3/AAC/whatever-encoding and has nothing to do with the encoding format.</p><p>Many movie "rippers" will by default reduce the dynamic range when converting AC-3 or DTS audio (the audio on most DVD movies) to other formats, because the high dynamic range of DVD-movies is unsuitable for small speakers. This is purely a matter of configuration though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mp3 has left me very disappointed in movies so far .
( probably the extreme dynamic range compression ) The dynamic range wo n't be compressed unless the video conversion application you are using is configured to do so .
Dynamic range compression is a signal processing step done * before * MP3/AAC/whatever-encoding and has nothing to do with the encoding format.Many movie " rippers " will by default reduce the dynamic range when converting AC-3 or DTS audio ( the audio on most DVD movies ) to other formats , because the high dynamic range of DVD-movies is unsuitable for small speakers .
This is purely a matter of configuration though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mp3 has left me very disappointed in movies so far.
(probably the extreme dynamic range compression)The dynamic range won't be compressed unless the video conversion application you are using is configured to do so.
Dynamic range compression is a signal processing step done *before* MP3/AAC/whatever-encoding and has nothing to do with the encoding format.Many movie "rippers" will by default reduce the dynamic range when converting AC-3 or DTS audio (the audio on most DVD movies) to other formats, because the high dynamic range of DVD-movies is unsuitable for small speakers.
This is purely a matter of configuration though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30809994</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263840180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>h264 is so incredible you don't need divx anyway.</p></div><p>My Pioneer DVD player doesn't play h.264. Neither does any other DVD player, except perhaps those that cost four figures (I haven't looked into that).</p><p>h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.</p></div><p>Yet another reason why buying DVD players with USB ports or supposed "features" that aren't update-able is backwards in my opinion.  I can support any codec that's out from a computer, including DVD.  It becomes readily apparent that the DVD player is the thing that you don't need hooked to the TV and the computer probably is.  (That's probably why more and more computers come standard equipped with an HDMI port).  Save yourself the hassle of buying multiple components and obsolete codec decoders, now more than ever is the time to be using a home theater PC.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>h264 is so incredible you do n't need divx anyway.My Pioneer DVD player does n't play h.264 .
Neither does any other DVD player , except perhaps those that cost four figures ( I have n't looked into that ) .h.264 might be incredible , but I have no way of playing it on my TV.Yet another reason why buying DVD players with USB ports or supposed " features " that are n't update-able is backwards in my opinion .
I can support any codec that 's out from a computer , including DVD .
It becomes readily apparent that the DVD player is the thing that you do n't need hooked to the TV and the computer probably is .
( That 's probably why more and more computers come standard equipped with an HDMI port ) .
Save yourself the hassle of buying multiple components and obsolete codec decoders , now more than ever is the time to be using a home theater PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>h264 is so incredible you don't need divx anyway.My Pioneer DVD player doesn't play h.264.
Neither does any other DVD player, except perhaps those that cost four figures (I haven't looked into that).h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.Yet another reason why buying DVD players with USB ports or supposed "features" that aren't update-able is backwards in my opinion.
I can support any codec that's out from a computer, including DVD.
It becomes readily apparent that the DVD player is the thing that you don't need hooked to the TV and the computer probably is.
(That's probably why more and more computers come standard equipped with an HDMI port).
Save yourself the hassle of buying multiple components and obsolete codec decoders, now more than ever is the time to be using a home theater PC.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806550</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263819720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I love the way you can use your keyboard to make small/medium/big jumps in Windows Media Player using [SHIFT]+[R.Arrow], [R.Arrow] and [CTRL]+[R.Arrow] respectively.</p></div></blockquote><p>In VLC:</p><ul><li>Shift + Left/Right arrow = Fast rewind/forward 3 seconds</li><li>Alt + Left/Right arrow = Fast rewind/forward 10 seconds</li><li>Ctrl + Left/Right arrow = Fast rewind/forward 1 minute</li></ul></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love the way you can use your keyboard to make small/medium/big jumps in Windows Media Player using [ SHIFT ] + [ R.Arrow ] , [ R.Arrow ] and [ CTRL ] + [ R.Arrow ] respectively.In VLC : Shift + Left/Right arrow = Fast rewind/forward 3 secondsAlt + Left/Right arrow = Fast rewind/forward 10 secondsCtrl + Left/Right arrow = Fast rewind/forward 1 minute</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love the way you can use your keyboard to make small/medium/big jumps in Windows Media Player using [SHIFT]+[R.Arrow], [R.Arrow] and [CTRL]+[R.Arrow] respectively.In VLC:Shift + Left/Right arrow = Fast rewind/forward 3 secondsAlt + Left/Right arrow = Fast rewind/forward 10 secondsCtrl + Left/Right arrow = Fast rewind/forward 1 minute
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810052</id>
	<title>handbrake uses ffmpeg</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263840420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So why would they drop support if they don't write the encoder.</p><p>Lazy.  I've always used AcidRip or my own scripts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So why would they drop support if they do n't write the encoder.Lazy .
I 've always used AcidRip or my own scripts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So why would they drop support if they don't write the encoder.Lazy.
I've always used AcidRip or my own scripts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804332</id>
	<title>0.9.3</title>
	<author>maino82</author>
	<datestamp>1263747840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I stuck with the 0.9.3 version for quite awhile because of the lack of support for AVI in the latest release, but grudgingly I switched over a few weeks back. MKV is choppy and buggy on my Ubuntu install for some reason (I get video tearing all the time and I can't seek without the audio getting out of sync or disappearing entirely). VLC handles the files a little more gracefully than MPlayer or Xine, but it's still not ideal. I'm banking on support getting better though (or upgrading my hardware if it turns out that's the problem). I do, however, like the chapters and subtitles features that MKV brings to the table.
<br> <br>
I can certainly understand to drop support for obsolete containers, but I think that calling AVI obsolete at this point is very premature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I stuck with the 0.9.3 version for quite awhile because of the lack of support for AVI in the latest release , but grudgingly I switched over a few weeks back .
MKV is choppy and buggy on my Ubuntu install for some reason ( I get video tearing all the time and I ca n't seek without the audio getting out of sync or disappearing entirely ) .
VLC handles the files a little more gracefully than MPlayer or Xine , but it 's still not ideal .
I 'm banking on support getting better though ( or upgrading my hardware if it turns out that 's the problem ) .
I do , however , like the chapters and subtitles features that MKV brings to the table .
I can certainly understand to drop support for obsolete containers , but I think that calling AVI obsolete at this point is very premature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I stuck with the 0.9.3 version for quite awhile because of the lack of support for AVI in the latest release, but grudgingly I switched over a few weeks back.
MKV is choppy and buggy on my Ubuntu install for some reason (I get video tearing all the time and I can't seek without the audio getting out of sync or disappearing entirely).
VLC handles the files a little more gracefully than MPlayer or Xine, but it's still not ideal.
I'm banking on support getting better though (or upgrading my hardware if it turns out that's the problem).
I do, however, like the chapters and subtitles features that MKV brings to the table.
I can certainly understand to drop support for obsolete containers, but I think that calling AVI obsolete at this point is very premature.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805988</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1263812700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are problems with mpeg4 as well, the licensing forbids to host videos bigger than 10 minutes on the web unless you pay  big $$$ to the patent holders (the mpeg consortium) one of the reasons why Youtube has the 10 minute limit on uploaded video files.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are problems with mpeg4 as well , the licensing forbids to host videos bigger than 10 minutes on the web unless you pay big $ $ $ to the patent holders ( the mpeg consortium ) one of the reasons why Youtube has the 10 minute limit on uploaded video files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are problems with mpeg4 as well, the licensing forbids to host videos bigger than 10 minutes on the web unless you pay  big $$$ to the patent holders (the mpeg consortium) one of the reasons why Youtube has the 10 minute limit on uploaded video files.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805758</id>
	<title>Re:Ummm, what?</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1263809580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But Sony didn't implement Xvid, it implemented DivX, and Xvid's openness is actually not guaranteed because of patents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But Sony did n't implement Xvid , it implemented DivX , and Xvid 's openness is actually not guaranteed because of patents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But Sony didn't implement Xvid, it implemented DivX, and Xvid's openness is actually not guaranteed because of patents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807722</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263829020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>VLC may not be a panacea, but re: your comments on small/medium/big jumps: you can adjust both the keyboard shortcuts and the amount of time of each jump in VLC; you can right-click from explorer to add a whole season of show X, too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>VLC may not be a panacea , but re : your comments on small/medium/big jumps : you can adjust both the keyboard shortcuts and the amount of time of each jump in VLC ; you can right-click from explorer to add a whole season of show X , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>VLC may not be a panacea, but re: your comments on small/medium/big jumps: you can adjust both the keyboard shortcuts and the amount of time of each jump in VLC; you can right-click from explorer to add a whole season of show X, too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160</id>
	<title>foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263746460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dropping all formats that Windows play by default is IMO a bad decision.  It may make the <a href="http://www.cccp-project.net/" title="cccp-project.net">CCCP Project</a> [cccp-project.net] more popular and spur more people to install Quicktime (yuck), but it'll also drive away lots of inexperienced users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dropping all formats that Windows play by default is IMO a bad decision .
It may make the CCCP Project [ cccp-project.net ] more popular and spur more people to install Quicktime ( yuck ) , but it 'll also drive away lots of inexperienced users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dropping all formats that Windows play by default is IMO a bad decision.
It may make the CCCP Project [cccp-project.net] more popular and spur more people to install Quicktime (yuck), but it'll also drive away lots of inexperienced users.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806028</id>
	<title>they aren't droping MPEG4</title>
	<author>Yaur</author>
	<datestamp>1263813240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>lost in TFS is that they are not dropping support for MPEG4 Part 2... they are just supporting ffmpeg instead of XviD and ffmpeg</htmltext>
<tokenext>lost in TFS is that they are not dropping support for MPEG4 Part 2... they are just supporting ffmpeg instead of XviD and ffmpeg</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lost in TFS is that they are not dropping support for MPEG4 Part 2... they are just supporting ffmpeg instead of XviD and ffmpeg</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806014</id>
	<title>Bad news for PS3 users?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263813060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering how the PS3 natively supports divx but has no (decent) support for mkv yet...  Sucks if you ripped a dvd only to learn that you need to transcode it further before watching.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering how the PS3 natively supports divx but has no ( decent ) support for mkv yet... Sucks if you ripped a dvd only to learn that you need to transcode it further before watching .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering how the PS3 natively supports divx but has no (decent) support for mkv yet...  Sucks if you ripped a dvd only to learn that you need to transcode it further before watching.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805216</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>otis wildflower</author>
	<datestamp>1263757440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as it can produce files that will play on my PS3 properly without reencoding/transcoding, that's OK with me.</p><p>My Xtreamer actually handles MKVs properly, PS3 not so much, alas.</p><p>I just wonder if/when there'll be an opensource project that isn't as antagonistic to its user community, I haven't seen developer crankiness like that since friggin OpenBSD.  I wonder if the devs are plants from Slysoft that drive 'normal' users into buying paid copies of AnyDVD?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as it can produce files that will play on my PS3 properly without reencoding/transcoding , that 's OK with me.My Xtreamer actually handles MKVs properly , PS3 not so much , alas.I just wonder if/when there 'll be an opensource project that is n't as antagonistic to its user community , I have n't seen developer crankiness like that since friggin OpenBSD .
I wonder if the devs are plants from Slysoft that drive 'normal ' users into buying paid copies of AnyDVD ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as it can produce files that will play on my PS3 properly without reencoding/transcoding, that's OK with me.My Xtreamer actually handles MKVs properly, PS3 not so much, alas.I just wonder if/when there'll be an opensource project that isn't as antagonistic to its user community, I haven't seen developer crankiness like that since friggin OpenBSD.
I wonder if the devs are plants from Slysoft that drive 'normal' users into buying paid copies of AnyDVD?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804198</id>
	<title>Time synch</title>
	<author>exabrial</author>
	<datestamp>1263746820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I may be off my base here, but I believe one of the big drawbacks from AVI (I didn't RTFA) is synching audio with video. You'll be watching a movie and suddenly it's dubbed worse than "Most Extreme Elimination Challenge."

I am extremely impressed with AAC + h.264. Mp3 has left me very disappointed in movies so far. (probably the extreme dynamic range compression)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I may be off my base here , but I believe one of the big drawbacks from AVI ( I did n't RTFA ) is synching audio with video .
You 'll be watching a movie and suddenly it 's dubbed worse than " Most Extreme Elimination Challenge .
" I am extremely impressed with AAC + h.264 .
Mp3 has left me very disappointed in movies so far .
( probably the extreme dynamic range compression )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I may be off my base here, but I believe one of the big drawbacks from AVI (I didn't RTFA) is synching audio with video.
You'll be watching a movie and suddenly it's dubbed worse than "Most Extreme Elimination Challenge.
"

I am extremely impressed with AAC + h.264.
Mp3 has left me very disappointed in movies so far.
(probably the extreme dynamic range compression)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810866</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263844440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But what about all our devices that DON'T PLAY H.264? We should just junk them and buy new ones? I, for one, don't like the idea of shelling out a few hundred bucks and shipping even MORE shit over to China to fuck up the environment just because these guys can't be bothered to host old versions of their code.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But what about all our devices that DO N'T PLAY H.264 ?
We should just junk them and buy new ones ?
I , for one , do n't like the idea of shelling out a few hundred bucks and shipping even MORE shit over to China to fuck up the environment just because these guys ca n't be bothered to host old versions of their code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what about all our devices that DON'T PLAY H.264?
We should just junk them and buy new ones?
I, for one, don't like the idea of shelling out a few hundred bucks and shipping even MORE shit over to China to fuck up the environment just because these guys can't be bothered to host old versions of their code.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263806820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Speak for yourself.<br>
<br>
Maybe VLC is better in playing video with low CPU load, but that doesn't really concern me much, having a semi-recent processor. It definitely plays more file formats out of the box, which is really nice I admit, but ergonomically, it's (in my opinion) too unpolished. For example I love the way you can use your keyboard to make small/medium/big jumps in Windows Media Player using [SHIFT]+[R.Arrow], [R.Arrow] and [CTRL]+[R.Arrow] respectively. I love the fact that you don't have to open a seperate window for the playlist, and you can add a whole season of show X from the explorer window by right-clicking.<br>
There are a few more nuisances in VLC on the usage front, but those are the major ones, and that's enough for me to prefer WMP, even though that means I have to go out of my way to install a few codecs here and there.<br>
<br>
Ofcourse that doesn't mean I don't have any gripes with Windows Media Player. I do, but just less than with VLC, and I also have VLC installed, because there are some things WMP even with the right codecs just refuses to play which doesn't seem to bother VLC that much. I just don't have it set up as the default player.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Speak for yourself .
Maybe VLC is better in playing video with low CPU load , but that does n't really concern me much , having a semi-recent processor .
It definitely plays more file formats out of the box , which is really nice I admit , but ergonomically , it 's ( in my opinion ) too unpolished .
For example I love the way you can use your keyboard to make small/medium/big jumps in Windows Media Player using [ SHIFT ] + [ R.Arrow ] , [ R.Arrow ] and [ CTRL ] + [ R.Arrow ] respectively .
I love the fact that you do n't have to open a seperate window for the playlist , and you can add a whole season of show X from the explorer window by right-clicking .
There are a few more nuisances in VLC on the usage front , but those are the major ones , and that 's enough for me to prefer WMP , even though that means I have to go out of my way to install a few codecs here and there .
Ofcourse that does n't mean I do n't have any gripes with Windows Media Player .
I do , but just less than with VLC , and I also have VLC installed , because there are some things WMP even with the right codecs just refuses to play which does n't seem to bother VLC that much .
I just do n't have it set up as the default player .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speak for yourself.
Maybe VLC is better in playing video with low CPU load, but that doesn't really concern me much, having a semi-recent processor.
It definitely plays more file formats out of the box, which is really nice I admit, but ergonomically, it's (in my opinion) too unpolished.
For example I love the way you can use your keyboard to make small/medium/big jumps in Windows Media Player using [SHIFT]+[R.Arrow], [R.Arrow] and [CTRL]+[R.Arrow] respectively.
I love the fact that you don't have to open a seperate window for the playlist, and you can add a whole season of show X from the explorer window by right-clicking.
There are a few more nuisances in VLC on the usage front, but those are the major ones, and that's enough for me to prefer WMP, even though that means I have to go out of my way to install a few codecs here and there.
Ofcourse that doesn't mean I don't have any gripes with Windows Media Player.
I do, but just less than with VLC, and I also have VLC installed, because there are some things WMP even with the right codecs just refuses to play which doesn't seem to bother VLC that much.
I just don't have it set up as the default player.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30811042</id>
	<title>Re:Now it needs .m2ts support</title>
	<author>metamatic</author>
	<datestamp>1263845340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>mkv is a great format, but it isn't supported by Windows 7, Mac OS X (Quicktime), 360 or PS3.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Or AppleTV, or my DVD player, or anything else I have. MKV may be open source, but it's a pain in the ass.

I've got a script which seems to be able to convert most MKV files into MP4s that will play, but I could still use a good, reliable MKV to MP4 converter. Links would be appreciated, OS X or Linux.</p><blockquote><div><p>I can however play an H.264/AC-3<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.m2ts file on Windows 7 and PS3.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Using MPEG-2 containers for MPEG-4 is a horrible hack on a par with sticking MPEG-4 in AVI. AVCHD is h.264 in MPEG-2 containers, and look at the problems people have with that. I suspect it was only done because hardware manufacturers already had hardware and firmware to handle MPEG-2 TS and PS, and didn't want to have to implement the more sophisticated and feature-rich MPEG-4.

(And no, MPEG-2 containers (whether TS or PS) don't work in OS X by default.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>mkv is a great format , but it is n't supported by Windows 7 , Mac OS X ( Quicktime ) , 360 or PS3 .
Or AppleTV , or my DVD player , or anything else I have .
MKV may be open source , but it 's a pain in the ass .
I 've got a script which seems to be able to convert most MKV files into MP4s that will play , but I could still use a good , reliable MKV to MP4 converter .
Links would be appreciated , OS X or Linux.I can however play an H.264/AC-3 .m2ts file on Windows 7 and PS3 .
Using MPEG-2 containers for MPEG-4 is a horrible hack on a par with sticking MPEG-4 in AVI .
AVCHD is h.264 in MPEG-2 containers , and look at the problems people have with that .
I suspect it was only done because hardware manufacturers already had hardware and firmware to handle MPEG-2 TS and PS , and did n't want to have to implement the more sophisticated and feature-rich MPEG-4 .
( And no , MPEG-2 containers ( whether TS or PS ) do n't work in OS X by default .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mkv is a great format, but it isn't supported by Windows 7, Mac OS X (Quicktime), 360 or PS3.
Or AppleTV, or my DVD player, or anything else I have.
MKV may be open source, but it's a pain in the ass.
I've got a script which seems to be able to convert most MKV files into MP4s that will play, but I could still use a good, reliable MKV to MP4 converter.
Links would be appreciated, OS X or Linux.I can however play an H.264/AC-3 .m2ts file on Windows 7 and PS3.
Using MPEG-2 containers for MPEG-4 is a horrible hack on a par with sticking MPEG-4 in AVI.
AVCHD is h.264 in MPEG-2 containers, and look at the problems people have with that.
I suspect it was only done because hardware manufacturers already had hardware and firmware to handle MPEG-2 TS and PS, and didn't want to have to implement the more sophisticated and feature-rich MPEG-4.
(And no, MPEG-2 containers (whether TS or PS) don't work in OS X by default.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1263747900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows doesn't play DivX or XviD files by default.  To my knowledge, Handbrake never encoded files that Windows would play without installing an extra player or codec.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows does n't play DivX or XviD files by default .
To my knowledge , Handbrake never encoded files that Windows would play without installing an extra player or codec .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows doesn't play DivX or XviD files by default.
To my knowledge, Handbrake never encoded files that Windows would play without installing an extra player or codec.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806592</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>ignavus</author>
	<datestamp>1263820320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My Cowon S9 does not play your fancy new formats. It plays AVI/XVid, or WMV - not mp4 etc.</p><p>Handbrake dropped support for the formats I need. I have dropped Handbrake. It is no longer useful to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My Cowon S9 does not play your fancy new formats .
It plays AVI/XVid , or WMV - not mp4 etc.Handbrake dropped support for the formats I need .
I have dropped Handbrake .
It is no longer useful to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Cowon S9 does not play your fancy new formats.
It plays AVI/XVid, or WMV - not mp4 etc.Handbrake dropped support for the formats I need.
I have dropped Handbrake.
It is no longer useful to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808326</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>spearway</author>
	<datestamp>1263832380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should look harder: <a href="http://www.apple.com/appletv/" title="apple.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.apple.com/appletv/</a> [apple.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should look harder : http : //www.apple.com/appletv/ [ apple.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should look harder: http://www.apple.com/appletv/ [apple.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804704</id>
	<title>Apple Friendly ?</title>
	<author>alexandre</author>
	<datestamp>1263751380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not Apple Friendly, it's world unfriendly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not Apple Friendly , it 's world unfriendly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not Apple Friendly, it's world unfriendly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806836</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Fex303</author>
	<datestamp>1263822660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/04/09/xbox-360-now-with-h-264-mpeg-4-playsforsure/" title="engadget.com">Cough.</a> [engadget.com] </p><p>Sorry, but there's plenty of other options out there that are extremely affordable and will happily play h.264.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>h.264 might be incredible , but I have no way of playing it on my TV .
Cough. [ engadget.com ] Sorry , but there 's plenty of other options out there that are extremely affordable and will happily play h.264 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.
Cough. [engadget.com] Sorry, but there's plenty of other options out there that are extremely affordable and will happily play h.264.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30809712</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263838980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's great if you don't mind the fact that Windows Media Player is essentially spyware, sending much of your info to Microsoft in such a way that you are uniquely identifiable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's great if you do n't mind the fact that Windows Media Player is essentially spyware , sending much of your info to Microsoft in such a way that you are uniquely identifiable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's great if you don't mind the fact that Windows Media Player is essentially spyware, sending much of your info to Microsoft in such a way that you are uniquely identifiable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804770</id>
	<title>Re:They don't like supporting it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263752100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Without commenting on why Handbrake has dropped support for AVI (I'm sure they have their reasons), it is a simply bit of a shame for users looking to make highly portable content. DivX is one of the most widely supported formats on devices ranging from portable media players, DVD and Blu-Ray players, digital TV's, set-top boxes, and even mobile phones. It's always been a major goal to make it extremely easy for people to take content from their computer and move it into their living room or take it with them on the go, and there are now over 250 million DivX devices out there.</p><p>There is of course now also DivX Plus, which uses H.264/AAC/MKV, and Handbrake can still output that. You can actually already find a preset for Handbrake <a href="http://labs.divx.com/node/15257" title="divx.com">here</a> [divx.com].  Devices certified for DivX Plus will be arriving this year, with announcements already covering <a href="http://investors.divx.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=434494" title="divx.com">Philips</a> [divx.com] and <a href="http://investors.divx.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=434496" title="divx.com">Seagate</a> [divx.com]. DivX Plus Web Player already supports these files so you can upload your DivX or DivX Plus file to any standard HTTP server and embed it directly in your web pages. It enables viewers to watch these files in embedded, windowed, or full-screen modes and save them for device transfer later. DivX Player provides free playback on Windows and Mac, and we also include an MKV splitter for Microsoft Media Foundation in Windows 7. By consequence of that, you can watch DivX Plus files with hardware acceleration and already stream them to Windows Media Center Extender and UPNP devices.</p><p>So again, for so many people who own DivX devices, it's unfortunate, but there are also many other tools out there that will do the job. It's at least nice to see them supporting MKV, which will work in DivX Plus devices in future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Without commenting on why Handbrake has dropped support for AVI ( I 'm sure they have their reasons ) , it is a simply bit of a shame for users looking to make highly portable content .
DivX is one of the most widely supported formats on devices ranging from portable media players , DVD and Blu-Ray players , digital TV 's , set-top boxes , and even mobile phones .
It 's always been a major goal to make it extremely easy for people to take content from their computer and move it into their living room or take it with them on the go , and there are now over 250 million DivX devices out there.There is of course now also DivX Plus , which uses H.264/AAC/MKV , and Handbrake can still output that .
You can actually already find a preset for Handbrake here [ divx.com ] .
Devices certified for DivX Plus will be arriving this year , with announcements already covering Philips [ divx.com ] and Seagate [ divx.com ] .
DivX Plus Web Player already supports these files so you can upload your DivX or DivX Plus file to any standard HTTP server and embed it directly in your web pages .
It enables viewers to watch these files in embedded , windowed , or full-screen modes and save them for device transfer later .
DivX Player provides free playback on Windows and Mac , and we also include an MKV splitter for Microsoft Media Foundation in Windows 7 .
By consequence of that , you can watch DivX Plus files with hardware acceleration and already stream them to Windows Media Center Extender and UPNP devices.So again , for so many people who own DivX devices , it 's unfortunate , but there are also many other tools out there that will do the job .
It 's at least nice to see them supporting MKV , which will work in DivX Plus devices in future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without commenting on why Handbrake has dropped support for AVI (I'm sure they have their reasons), it is a simply bit of a shame for users looking to make highly portable content.
DivX is one of the most widely supported formats on devices ranging from portable media players, DVD and Blu-Ray players, digital TV's, set-top boxes, and even mobile phones.
It's always been a major goal to make it extremely easy for people to take content from their computer and move it into their living room or take it with them on the go, and there are now over 250 million DivX devices out there.There is of course now also DivX Plus, which uses H.264/AAC/MKV, and Handbrake can still output that.
You can actually already find a preset for Handbrake here [divx.com].
Devices certified for DivX Plus will be arriving this year, with announcements already covering Philips [divx.com] and Seagate [divx.com].
DivX Plus Web Player already supports these files so you can upload your DivX or DivX Plus file to any standard HTTP server and embed it directly in your web pages.
It enables viewers to watch these files in embedded, windowed, or full-screen modes and save them for device transfer later.
DivX Player provides free playback on Windows and Mac, and we also include an MKV splitter for Microsoft Media Foundation in Windows 7.
By consequence of that, you can watch DivX Plus files with hardware acceleration and already stream them to Windows Media Center Extender and UPNP devices.So again, for so many people who own DivX devices, it's unfortunate, but there are also many other tools out there that will do the job.
It's at least nice to see them supporting MKV, which will work in DivX Plus devices in future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805702</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263808560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Windows doesn't play DivX or XviD files by default.</p></div><p>Sure it does. Windows 7 supports MPEG-4 Part 2 video by default. Both DivX and XviD are implementations of that standard.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows does n't play DivX or XviD files by default.Sure it does .
Windows 7 supports MPEG-4 Part 2 video by default .
Both DivX and XviD are implementations of that standard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows doesn't play DivX or XviD files by default.Sure it does.
Windows 7 supports MPEG-4 Part 2 video by default.
Both DivX and XviD are implementations of that standard.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810570</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263842940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure you have.</p><p>First: A player that plays H.264 may be available for less that 100 bucks. (Tip: The cheaper ones usually can do more, because the companies are not tied to any media industry pessure. They all use the same chips anyway.)</p><p>Or: You do what I do and use your computer for it. Every recent laptop can play H.264 in full HD. Just plug that into your TV. If you have to, put it where your DVD player stands now. It will even look nearly the same.<br>And my guess is, that your laptop also supports spdif and analog audio out.</p><p>But maybe I&rsquo;m just out of the TV+player world for too long. A projector costs practically the same as a good TV, you usually have an amplifier and speakers, and a PC does the rest. BitTorrent (and perhaps Hulu) is the replacement for the receiver card and TiVo. That&rsquo;s my setup for years now. Can&rsquo;t imagine going back. It would be like going back to Windows...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure you have.First : A player that plays H.264 may be available for less that 100 bucks .
( Tip : The cheaper ones usually can do more , because the companies are not tied to any media industry pessure .
They all use the same chips anyway .
) Or : You do what I do and use your computer for it .
Every recent laptop can play H.264 in full HD .
Just plug that into your TV .
If you have to , put it where your DVD player stands now .
It will even look nearly the same.And my guess is , that your laptop also supports spdif and analog audio out.But maybe I    m just out of the TV + player world for too long .
A projector costs practically the same as a good TV , you usually have an amplifier and speakers , and a PC does the rest .
BitTorrent ( and perhaps Hulu ) is the replacement for the receiver card and TiVo .
That    s my setup for years now .
Can    t imagine going back .
It would be like going back to Windows.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure you have.First: A player that plays H.264 may be available for less that 100 bucks.
(Tip: The cheaper ones usually can do more, because the companies are not tied to any media industry pessure.
They all use the same chips anyway.
)Or: You do what I do and use your computer for it.
Every recent laptop can play H.264 in full HD.
Just plug that into your TV.
If you have to, put it where your DVD player stands now.
It will even look nearly the same.And my guess is, that your laptop also supports spdif and analog audio out.But maybe I’m just out of the TV+player world for too long.
A projector costs practically the same as a good TV, you usually have an amplifier and speakers, and a PC does the rest.
BitTorrent (and perhaps Hulu) is the replacement for the receiver card and TiVo.
That’s my setup for years now.
Can’t imagine going back.
It would be like going back to Windows...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810126</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263840840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The PS3 does. Obviously you haven't "looked into that." It wasn't that hard.</p><p>4 figures??? Is there even a DVD player that costs that much?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The PS3 does .
Obviously you have n't " looked into that .
" It was n't that hard.4 figures ? ? ?
Is there even a DVD player that costs that much ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The PS3 does.
Obviously you haven't "looked into that.
" It wasn't that hard.4 figures???
Is there even a DVD player that costs that much?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810894</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263844560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>My Pioneer DVD player doesn't play h.264. Neither does any other DVD player, except perhaps those that cost four figures (I haven't looked into that).</p><p>h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.</p></div></blockquote><p>Got an Xbox 360 or a PS3? Problem solved.</p><p>Otherwise, <a href="http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=5569260&amp;SRCCODE=GOOGLEBASE&amp;cm\_mmc\_o=VRqCjC7BBTkwCjCECjCE" title="tigerdirect.com">$80 will get you a Blu-ray player that handles h.264 and upscales DVDs to 1080p</a> [tigerdirect.com].</p><p>Or there's AppleTV. Or Popcorn Hour. Or MviX boxes. Or various <a href="http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=5364285&amp;SRCCODE=GOOGLEBASE&amp;cm\_mmc\_o=VRqCjC7BBTkwCjCECjCE" title="tigerdirect.com">$90 media players</a> [tigerdirect.com] that access any USB hard drive you have hanging around. (That one even supports ext3.)</p><p>I mean, yeah, I have a DVD player that supports DivX that I used a few years ago. But frankly, it's a hell of a lot more convenient to pull stuff across my network or stick it on a hard drive than to mess with burning DVDs, even ignoring the h.264 issue. Spend the $100, you'll thank yourself.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My Pioneer DVD player does n't play h.264 .
Neither does any other DVD player , except perhaps those that cost four figures ( I have n't looked into that ) .h.264 might be incredible , but I have no way of playing it on my TV.Got an Xbox 360 or a PS3 ?
Problem solved.Otherwise , $ 80 will get you a Blu-ray player that handles h.264 and upscales DVDs to 1080p [ tigerdirect.com ] .Or there 's AppleTV .
Or Popcorn Hour .
Or MviX boxes .
Or various $ 90 media players [ tigerdirect.com ] that access any USB hard drive you have hanging around .
( That one even supports ext3 .
) I mean , yeah , I have a DVD player that supports DivX that I used a few years ago .
But frankly , it 's a hell of a lot more convenient to pull stuff across my network or stick it on a hard drive than to mess with burning DVDs , even ignoring the h.264 issue .
Spend the $ 100 , you 'll thank yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Pioneer DVD player doesn't play h.264.
Neither does any other DVD player, except perhaps those that cost four figures (I haven't looked into that).h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.Got an Xbox 360 or a PS3?
Problem solved.Otherwise, $80 will get you a Blu-ray player that handles h.264 and upscales DVDs to 1080p [tigerdirect.com].Or there's AppleTV.
Or Popcorn Hour.
Or MviX boxes.
Or various $90 media players [tigerdirect.com] that access any USB hard drive you have hanging around.
(That one even supports ext3.
)I mean, yeah, I have a DVD player that supports DivX that I used a few years ago.
But frankly, it's a hell of a lot more convenient to pull stuff across my network or stick it on a hard drive than to mess with burning DVDs, even ignoring the h.264 issue.
Spend the $100, you'll thank yourself.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805692</id>
	<title>I despise MKV</title>
	<author>meerling</author>
	<datestamp>1263808380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For reasons I'm not going through again, but I absolutely can't stand MKV.<br><br>MP4 is mostly ok, so it's not that big of a deal, I can convert stuff to AVI on the off chance I need it to.<br><br>Guess it doesn't matter too much to me, I don't even use handbrake.<br>When I tested a year or two ago on some stuff I wanted converted, it failed to meet my standards.<br><br>So I guess their change isn't any loss for me, but I wonder how much share they're going to lose with this change.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For reasons I 'm not going through again , but I absolutely ca n't stand MKV.MP4 is mostly ok , so it 's not that big of a deal , I can convert stuff to AVI on the off chance I need it to.Guess it does n't matter too much to me , I do n't even use handbrake.When I tested a year or two ago on some stuff I wanted converted , it failed to meet my standards.So I guess their change is n't any loss for me , but I wonder how much share they 're going to lose with this change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For reasons I'm not going through again, but I absolutely can't stand MKV.MP4 is mostly ok, so it's not that big of a deal, I can convert stuff to AVI on the off chance I need it to.Guess it doesn't matter too much to me, I don't even use handbrake.When I tested a year or two ago on some stuff I wanted converted, it failed to meet my standards.So I guess their change isn't any loss for me, but I wonder how much share they're going to lose with this change.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805634</id>
	<title>not so smart</title>
	<author>SuperDre</author>
	<datestamp>1263807300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and as always, you see developers thinking they know best... Since a lot of devices out there still don't support MKV or MP4 (and especially h.264 in whatever kind of container) it's a stupid decision for dropping avi support..It's a common problem with these types of developers who can't see the bigger picture..
yeah, a lot of brand new players support these things now yeah, but not everybody is a morron and buys every new player that gets on the market if their current device is sufficient enough for them...
but then again, it's their creation so thay can do whatever they want with handbrake...</htmltext>
<tokenext>and as always , you see developers thinking they know best... Since a lot of devices out there still do n't support MKV or MP4 ( and especially h.264 in whatever kind of container ) it 's a stupid decision for dropping avi support..It 's a common problem with these types of developers who ca n't see the bigger picture. . yeah , a lot of brand new players support these things now yeah , but not everybody is a morron and buys every new player that gets on the market if their current device is sufficient enough for them.. . but then again , it 's their creation so thay can do whatever they want with handbrake.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and as always, you see developers thinking they know best... Since a lot of devices out there still don't support MKV or MP4 (and especially h.264 in whatever kind of container) it's a stupid decision for dropping avi support..It's a common problem with these types of developers who can't see the bigger picture..
yeah, a lot of brand new players support these things now yeah, but not everybody is a morron and buys every new player that gets on the market if their current device is sufficient enough for them...
but then again, it's their creation so thay can do whatever they want with handbrake...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806326</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263817020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try using <a href="http://winff.org/html\_new/" title="winff.org" rel="nofollow">WinFF</a> [winff.org] - it's a very simple frontend to FFMpeg for Windows/Linux.<br> <br>

Useful to those that know FFMpeg but can't be arsed to remember the syntax, or just like to have lots of presets. <br> <br>Link: <a href="http://winff.org/html\_new/" title="winff.org" rel="nofollow">http://winff.org/html\_new/</a> [winff.org] [winff.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try using WinFF [ winff.org ] - it 's a very simple frontend to FFMpeg for Windows/Linux .
Useful to those that know FFMpeg but ca n't be arsed to remember the syntax , or just like to have lots of presets .
Link : http : //winff.org/html \ _new/ [ winff.org ] [ winff.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try using WinFF [winff.org] - it's a very simple frontend to FFMpeg for Windows/Linux.
Useful to those that know FFMpeg but can't be arsed to remember the syntax, or just like to have lots of presets.
Link: http://winff.org/html\_new/ [winff.org] [winff.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804588</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>Pentium100</author>
	<datestamp>1263750300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of DivX DVD players do not support h264 or mkv. Recently I was looking for a DVD player that supported h264, but I only could find Bluray players (very expensive) and "media centers" (also very expensive) that supported a lot of formats, had an ethernet or WiFi capability and no DVD drive. And I don;t see people buying a new DVD player just because it supports this new codec. Those who need a DVD player should look for one with most capabilities, but those who already have one will continue using it.</p><p>I have never used chapters (not on Laserdisc, DVD or mkv files) and I have seen some<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.avi files with AC3 (which is Dolby digital) audio on them.</p><p>I agree about the subtitles, but, unless you are watching anime, you will have to find the subtitles yourself, they will be contained in a separate file and you will be able to watch the movie with subtitles no matter what container it is in. (I prefer hard subs though).</p><p>Don't get me wrong - I like h264, I usually download anime in this codec, unless it is not available. But that is because I watch anime on my computer, so I don't have to worry about compatibility problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of DivX DVD players do not support h264 or mkv .
Recently I was looking for a DVD player that supported h264 , but I only could find Bluray players ( very expensive ) and " media centers " ( also very expensive ) that supported a lot of formats , had an ethernet or WiFi capability and no DVD drive .
And I don ; t see people buying a new DVD player just because it supports this new codec .
Those who need a DVD player should look for one with most capabilities , but those who already have one will continue using it.I have never used chapters ( not on Laserdisc , DVD or mkv files ) and I have seen some .avi files with AC3 ( which is Dolby digital ) audio on them.I agree about the subtitles , but , unless you are watching anime , you will have to find the subtitles yourself , they will be contained in a separate file and you will be able to watch the movie with subtitles no matter what container it is in .
( I prefer hard subs though ) .Do n't get me wrong - I like h264 , I usually download anime in this codec , unless it is not available .
But that is because I watch anime on my computer , so I do n't have to worry about compatibility problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of DivX DVD players do not support h264 or mkv.
Recently I was looking for a DVD player that supported h264, but I only could find Bluray players (very expensive) and "media centers" (also very expensive) that supported a lot of formats, had an ethernet or WiFi capability and no DVD drive.
And I don;t see people buying a new DVD player just because it supports this new codec.
Those who need a DVD player should look for one with most capabilities, but those who already have one will continue using it.I have never used chapters (not on Laserdisc, DVD or mkv files) and I have seen some .avi files with AC3 (which is Dolby digital) audio on them.I agree about the subtitles, but, unless you are watching anime, you will have to find the subtitles yourself, they will be contained in a separate file and you will be able to watch the movie with subtitles no matter what container it is in.
(I prefer hard subs though).Don't get me wrong - I like h264, I usually download anime in this codec, unless it is not available.
But that is because I watch anime on my computer, so I don't have to worry about compatibility problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805976</id>
	<title>Re:They don't like supporting it</title>
	<author>bheer</author>
	<datestamp>1263812580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mark parent +1 insightful. Most DVD player imports from Asia support DivX (in fact, the only ones who don't support it are the big-brand names like Sony). I've taken random<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.avi files, burnt 'em on a DVD-R and these have played on a $30 DVD player. Yeah, I know it's not very high-tech, but it works.</p><p>I do hope they'll keep the old version (which supported Xvid/Divx) around for download.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mark parent + 1 insightful .
Most DVD player imports from Asia support DivX ( in fact , the only ones who do n't support it are the big-brand names like Sony ) .
I 've taken random .avi files , burnt 'em on a DVD-R and these have played on a $ 30 DVD player .
Yeah , I know it 's not very high-tech , but it works.I do hope they 'll keep the old version ( which supported Xvid/Divx ) around for download .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mark parent +1 insightful.
Most DVD player imports from Asia support DivX (in fact, the only ones who don't support it are the big-brand names like Sony).
I've taken random .avi files, burnt 'em on a DVD-R and these have played on a $30 DVD player.
Yeah, I know it's not very high-tech, but it works.I do hope they'll keep the old version (which supported Xvid/Divx) around for download.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805644</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>that this is not und</author>
	<datestamp>1263807420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>Why would they care about what windows does? </em></p><p>Well, sure.  You've got a point.  Maybe they should just go back to only making the version for BeOS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would they care about what windows does ?
Well , sure .
You 've got a point .
Maybe they should just go back to only making the version for BeOS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would they care about what windows does?
Well, sure.
You've got a point.
Maybe they should just go back to only making the version for BeOS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810910</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>jridley</author>
	<datestamp>1263844680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's all great.  Where do I buy a set-top box for $50 that will play AVC files off a thumb drive?</p><p>I don't really dive a damn about chapters, subtitles, lossless dolby digital or any of that other crud.  I just want to grab some video in relatively small format, I don't care all that much about quality (though honestly XviDs look fine to me) and watch a TV show from last week.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's all great .
Where do I buy a set-top box for $ 50 that will play AVC files off a thumb drive ? I do n't really dive a damn about chapters , subtitles , lossless dolby digital or any of that other crud .
I just want to grab some video in relatively small format , I do n't care all that much about quality ( though honestly XviDs look fine to me ) and watch a TV show from last week .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's all great.
Where do I buy a set-top box for $50 that will play AVC files off a thumb drive?I don't really dive a damn about chapters, subtitles, lossless dolby digital or any of that other crud.
I just want to grab some video in relatively small format, I don't care all that much about quality (though honestly XviDs look fine to me) and watch a TV show from last week.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>je ne sais quoi</author>
	<datestamp>1263749460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>In any case, handbrake started as an application for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HandBrake" title="wikipedia.org">BeOS</a> [wikipedia.org] and didn't even have a windows gui until version <a href="http://trac.handbrake.fr/browser/tags/0.9.4/NEWS" title="handbrake.fr">0.8.5</a> [handbrake.fr].  I was using it on macs way back in the day when 700 Mb was your practical limit because hard drive space was still more precious than blank CDs and writable DVDs were hugely expensive. <br> <br> Why would they care about what windows does?  It survived without windows before it was famous, it'll survive without divx -- h264 is so incredible you don't need divx anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In any case , handbrake started as an application for BeOS [ wikipedia.org ] and did n't even have a windows gui until version 0.8.5 [ handbrake.fr ] .
I was using it on macs way back in the day when 700 Mb was your practical limit because hard drive space was still more precious than blank CDs and writable DVDs were hugely expensive .
Why would they care about what windows does ?
It survived without windows before it was famous , it 'll survive without divx -- h264 is so incredible you do n't need divx anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In any case, handbrake started as an application for BeOS [wikipedia.org] and didn't even have a windows gui until version 0.8.5 [handbrake.fr].
I was using it on macs way back in the day when 700 Mb was your practical limit because hard drive space was still more precious than blank CDs and writable DVDs were hugely expensive.
Why would they care about what windows does?
It survived without windows before it was famous, it'll survive without divx -- h264 is so incredible you don't need divx anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804392</id>
	<title>Wow, really a lot of anger</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263748320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesus! How dare they!  The nerve.</p><p>I mean, I know it really pisses me off when people develop something free and open source and then make a decision to remove something outdated and replaced by newer functionality that I happen to disagree with.</p><p>It isn't like I could just download the old code and patch it into the new code.  Or maintain a DivX patchset.</p><p>No, it's easier to complain...</p><p>But seriously guys, DivX is old and outdated, AVI even moreso.  H.264 and modern containers make more sense, are becoming more widely supported.</p><p>Complaining that windows doesn't natively support it is like getting pissed when people use SVG because windows doesn't natively support it.  Or PNG and internet explorer.  Be mad at Microsoft for not supporting more than craptasticly outdated AVI.</p><p>Seriously guys, get over it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesus !
How dare they !
The nerve.I mean , I know it really pisses me off when people develop something free and open source and then make a decision to remove something outdated and replaced by newer functionality that I happen to disagree with.It is n't like I could just download the old code and patch it into the new code .
Or maintain a DivX patchset.No , it 's easier to complain...But seriously guys , DivX is old and outdated , AVI even moreso .
H.264 and modern containers make more sense , are becoming more widely supported.Complaining that windows does n't natively support it is like getting pissed when people use SVG because windows does n't natively support it .
Or PNG and internet explorer .
Be mad at Microsoft for not supporting more than craptasticly outdated AVI.Seriously guys , get over it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesus!
How dare they!
The nerve.I mean, I know it really pisses me off when people develop something free and open source and then make a decision to remove something outdated and replaced by newer functionality that I happen to disagree with.It isn't like I could just download the old code and patch it into the new code.
Or maintain a DivX patchset.No, it's easier to complain...But seriously guys, DivX is old and outdated, AVI even moreso.
H.264 and modern containers make more sense, are becoming more widely supported.Complaining that windows doesn't natively support it is like getting pissed when people use SVG because windows doesn't natively support it.
Or PNG and internet explorer.
Be mad at Microsoft for not supporting more than craptasticly outdated AVI.Seriously guys, get over it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804426</id>
	<title>Big FD.</title>
	<author>xigxag</author>
	<datestamp>1263748680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First of all the original handbrake.fr article says nothing specifically about DivX.  It talks about XviD and OGM.  I guess OGM wasn't "controversial" enough for the editors so they ignored that and focused on DivX.</p><p>But the real issue is: Big deal, DivX themselves are <a href="http://www.divx.com/en/mkv" title="divx.com">moving to H.264/mkv</a> [divx.com] with all deliberate speed.  Even they realize there's no point in anyone holding on to codecs and containers which are inferior in every respect.  So, since mkv is a legitimate container in DivX7, the writeup is in fact erroneous.  Surprise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all the original handbrake.fr article says nothing specifically about DivX .
It talks about XviD and OGM .
I guess OGM was n't " controversial " enough for the editors so they ignored that and focused on DivX.But the real issue is : Big deal , DivX themselves are moving to H.264/mkv [ divx.com ] with all deliberate speed .
Even they realize there 's no point in anyone holding on to codecs and containers which are inferior in every respect .
So , since mkv is a legitimate container in DivX7 , the writeup is in fact erroneous .
Surprise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all the original handbrake.fr article says nothing specifically about DivX.
It talks about XviD and OGM.
I guess OGM wasn't "controversial" enough for the editors so they ignored that and focused on DivX.But the real issue is: Big deal, DivX themselves are moving to H.264/mkv [divx.com] with all deliberate speed.
Even they realize there's no point in anyone holding on to codecs and containers which are inferior in every respect.
So, since mkv is a legitimate container in DivX7, the writeup is in fact erroneous.
Surprise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30809990</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>brouski</author>
	<datestamp>1263840180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What about when you only have one hand free?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What about when you only have one hand free ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about when you only have one hand free?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263747420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows users should install VLC.  Windows users who can't be bothered to use anything other than Windows Media Player can suck it, seriously.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows users should install VLC .
Windows users who ca n't be bothered to use anything other than Windows Media Player can suck it , seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows users should install VLC.
Windows users who can't be bothered to use anything other than Windows Media Player can suck it, seriously.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806514</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263819060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know about your system, of course, but on mine (Ubuntu) VLC is equally capable of jumping with the arrow keys: Alt+Arrow for five seconds, Ctrl+Arrow for one minute and Ctrl+Alt+Arrow for five minutes.</p><p>You're completely right about the playlist thing, though: I think it's a rather bad design decision too (most of the time I use wmii, but when I'm on KDE there are some issues too with disappearing subwindows etc).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about your system , of course , but on mine ( Ubuntu ) VLC is equally capable of jumping with the arrow keys : Alt + Arrow for five seconds , Ctrl + Arrow for one minute and Ctrl + Alt + Arrow for five minutes.You 're completely right about the playlist thing , though : I think it 's a rather bad design decision too ( most of the time I use wmii , but when I 'm on KDE there are some issues too with disappearing subwindows etc ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about your system, of course, but on mine (Ubuntu) VLC is equally capable of jumping with the arrow keys: Alt+Arrow for five seconds, Ctrl+Arrow for one minute and Ctrl+Alt+Arrow for five minutes.You're completely right about the playlist thing, though: I think it's a rather bad design decision too (most of the time I use wmii, but when I'm on KDE there are some issues too with disappearing subwindows etc).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805904</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>Bender Unit 22</author>
	<datestamp>1263811860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No but the WD TV player <a href="http://www.wdc.com/en/products/WDTV/" title="wdc.com">http://www.wdc.com/en/products/WDTV/</a> [wdc.com] can play h.264 mkv etc in 1080p. I consider it to be cheap, just make sure to get the version with networking.</p><p>I am not sure if it can do different framerate directly to the tv properly(if the TV supports them).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No but the WD TV player http : //www.wdc.com/en/products/WDTV/ [ wdc.com ] can play h.264 mkv etc in 1080p .
I consider it to be cheap , just make sure to get the version with networking.I am not sure if it can do different framerate directly to the tv properly ( if the TV supports them ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No but the WD TV player http://www.wdc.com/en/products/WDTV/ [wdc.com] can play h.264 mkv etc in 1080p.
I consider it to be cheap, just make sure to get the version with networking.I am not sure if it can do different framerate directly to the tv properly(if the TV supports them).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806278</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263816240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just a comment, you can also jump with VLC, at least i can.</p><p>Small jump: R/L Arrow + Shift<br>Medium Jump: R/L Arrow + Alt<br>Big Jump: R/L Arrow + Ctrl</p><p>Check your keybindings if you can't use them</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a comment , you can also jump with VLC , at least i can.Small jump : R/L Arrow + ShiftMedium Jump : R/L Arrow + AltBig Jump : R/L Arrow + CtrlCheck your keybindings if you ca n't use them</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a comment, you can also jump with VLC, at least i can.Small jump: R/L Arrow + ShiftMedium Jump: R/L Arrow + AltBig Jump: R/L Arrow + CtrlCheck your keybindings if you can't use them</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805334</id>
	<title>Terminology?</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1263845580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Help me out here. They are dropping DivX because AVI is obsolete? Aren't these two different things? As in: DivX is a codec, and AVI is a container format. So you can encode your video using DivX and store in in an AVI file. Or you could encode using DivX and store in an Ogg file. Or even a raw MPEG4 file. Could someone explain what is \_really\_ going on here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Help me out here .
They are dropping DivX because AVI is obsolete ?
Are n't these two different things ?
As in : DivX is a codec , and AVI is a container format .
So you can encode your video using DivX and store in in an AVI file .
Or you could encode using DivX and store in an Ogg file .
Or even a raw MPEG4 file .
Could someone explain what is \ _really \ _ going on here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Help me out here.
They are dropping DivX because AVI is obsolete?
Aren't these two different things?
As in: DivX is a codec, and AVI is a container format.
So you can encode your video using DivX and store in in an AVI file.
Or you could encode using DivX and store in an Ogg file.
Or even a raw MPEG4 file.
Could someone explain what is \_really\_ going on here?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810566</id>
	<title>Re:you could say...</title>
	<author>FreonTrip</author>
	<datestamp>1263842880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeah! *scenic views of Miami*</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeah !
* scenic views of Miami *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeah!
*scenic views of Miami*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806092</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>gkhan1</author>
	<datestamp>1263814140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You should really try acutally using VLC for a while, then you'd know that it does, in fact, do exactly that. Try shift, alt or ctrl plus an arrow key for a small, medium or large jump, respectively.

The fact is that VLC can do so much more useful stuff than any other video player that you're crazy not to use it. One obvious feature that you can't live without is that you can modify the syncing between the audio and video on the fly with the j/k keys. So if your video is out of sync, you can easily fix that. Another thing is that it can crop the video on the fly, so if you have a 16:9 video on a 16:10 screen, you can just crop it to the right aspect ratio so you don't get any black bars. And it can do so, so much more.

Really, it's insanity to use anything else.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You should really try acutally using VLC for a while , then you 'd know that it does , in fact , do exactly that .
Try shift , alt or ctrl plus an arrow key for a small , medium or large jump , respectively .
The fact is that VLC can do so much more useful stuff than any other video player that you 're crazy not to use it .
One obvious feature that you ca n't live without is that you can modify the syncing between the audio and video on the fly with the j/k keys .
So if your video is out of sync , you can easily fix that .
Another thing is that it can crop the video on the fly , so if you have a 16 : 9 video on a 16 : 10 screen , you can just crop it to the right aspect ratio so you do n't get any black bars .
And it can do so , so much more .
Really , it 's insanity to use anything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should really try acutally using VLC for a while, then you'd know that it does, in fact, do exactly that.
Try shift, alt or ctrl plus an arrow key for a small, medium or large jump, respectively.
The fact is that VLC can do so much more useful stuff than any other video player that you're crazy not to use it.
One obvious feature that you can't live without is that you can modify the syncing between the audio and video on the fly with the j/k keys.
So if your video is out of sync, you can easily fix that.
Another thing is that it can crop the video on the fly, so if you have a 16:9 video on a 16:10 screen, you can just crop it to the right aspect ratio so you don't get any black bars.
And it can do so, so much more.
Really, it's insanity to use anything else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30814502</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>caitsith01</author>
	<datestamp>1263819840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is time to move on from this old container format and also move away from older DivX and XviD (MPEG-4 ASP) formats onto the newer H.264 / MPEG-4 (x264) video encoding formats.</p></div><p>Great!  I look forward to you visiting my house to upgrade all of my hardware which supports DivX but not h264.</p><p>It's really nice of you to go to so much effort to help us all "move on".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is time to move on from this old container format and also move away from older DivX and XviD ( MPEG-4 ASP ) formats onto the newer H.264 / MPEG-4 ( x264 ) video encoding formats.Great !
I look forward to you visiting my house to upgrade all of my hardware which supports DivX but not h264.It 's really nice of you to go to so much effort to help us all " move on " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is time to move on from this old container format and also move away from older DivX and XviD (MPEG-4 ASP) formats onto the newer H.264 / MPEG-4 (x264) video encoding formats.Great!
I look forward to you visiting my house to upgrade all of my hardware which supports DivX but not h264.It's really nice of you to go to so much effort to help us all "move on".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807996</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1263830460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take a look at a popcorn hour network media tank. They play just about anything, including h.264.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take a look at a popcorn hour network media tank .
They play just about anything , including h.264 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take a look at a popcorn hour network media tank.
They play just about anything, including h.264.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805928</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263812100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For example I love the way you can use your keyboard to make small/medium/big jumps in Windows Media Player using [SHIFT]+[R.Arrow], [R.Arrow] and [CTRL]+[R.Arrow] respectively.</p></div><p>VLC does that...</p><p>CTRL + L/R arrow, ALT + L/R arrow and SHIFT + L/R arrow for big, medium and small jumps forwards and back.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For example I love the way you can use your keyboard to make small/medium/big jumps in Windows Media Player using [ SHIFT ] + [ R.Arrow ] , [ R.Arrow ] and [ CTRL ] + [ R.Arrow ] respectively.VLC does that...CTRL + L/R arrow , ALT + L/R arrow and SHIFT + L/R arrow for big , medium and small jumps forwards and back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For example I love the way you can use your keyboard to make small/medium/big jumps in Windows Media Player using [SHIFT]+[R.Arrow], [R.Arrow] and [CTRL]+[R.Arrow] respectively.VLC does that...CTRL + L/R arrow, ALT + L/R arrow and SHIFT + L/R arrow for big, medium and small jumps forwards and back.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805190</id>
	<title>Re:Sense Of Perspective</title>
	<author>igb</author>
	<datestamp>1263757140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is remarkable the amount of vitriol that people will unleash at free software here on Slashdot.   The software is released free by volunteers.  If you like it, use it.  If you don't like it, use something else.  A rant about ``I don't care'' and ``I've never heard'' and ``What have they developed'' might be fitting were this the behaviour of a large, market-dominating for-money application, but in fact it's a volunteer effort producing free software.   You attitude seems to lack just a hint of proportion, and has no perspective whatsoever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is remarkable the amount of vitriol that people will unleash at free software here on Slashdot .
The software is released free by volunteers .
If you like it , use it .
If you do n't like it , use something else .
A rant about ` ` I do n't care' ' and ` ` I 've never heard' ' and ` ` What have they developed' ' might be fitting were this the behaviour of a large , market-dominating for-money application , but in fact it 's a volunteer effort producing free software .
You attitude seems to lack just a hint of proportion , and has no perspective whatsoever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is remarkable the amount of vitriol that people will unleash at free software here on Slashdot.
The software is released free by volunteers.
If you like it, use it.
If you don't like it, use something else.
A rant about ``I don't care'' and ``I've never heard'' and ``What have they developed'' might be fitting were this the behaviour of a large, market-dominating for-money application, but in fact it's a volunteer effort producing free software.
You attitude seems to lack just a hint of proportion, and has no perspective whatsoever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807834</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263829680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Why would they care about what windows does?</p></div><p>Huh, because it's the only relevant OS ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would they care about what windows does ? Huh , because it 's the only relevant OS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Why would they care about what windows does?Huh, because it's the only relevant OS ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807018</id>
	<title>Re:Talking about apples and oranges.</title>
	<author>cheekyboy</author>
	<datestamp>1263823980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dont drop old stuff, thats a MS taktic , Linux still supports<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.txt files right and thats old hat.<br>Linux still supports GIF and 100 other old picture formats.</p><p>We cannot update those cheap chineese dvd players or portable viewers etc... dropping support is stupid as stupid does forrest.</p><p>I considered moving to mp4/mkv, but decided not to yet, too many old devices wont accept it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dont drop old stuff , thats a MS taktic , Linux still supports .txt files right and thats old hat.Linux still supports GIF and 100 other old picture formats.We can not update those cheap chineese dvd players or portable viewers etc... dropping support is stupid as stupid does forrest.I considered moving to mp4/mkv , but decided not to yet , too many old devices wont accept it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dont drop old stuff, thats a MS taktic , Linux still supports .txt files right and thats old hat.Linux still supports GIF and 100 other old picture formats.We cannot update those cheap chineese dvd players or portable viewers etc... dropping support is stupid as stupid does forrest.I considered moving to mp4/mkv, but decided not to yet, too many old devices wont accept it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807628</id>
	<title>HandBrake v0.9.3 SVN1413</title>
	<author>caveman978</author>
	<datestamp>1263828600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://trac.handbrake.fr/changeset/1413" title="handbrake.fr" rel="nofollow">http://trac.handbrake.fr/changeset/1413</a> [handbrake.fr]

In between v0.9.3 and v0.9.4; HandBrake was patched to make Xvid/AVI work properly with DVDs that contained VBR audio.
In otherwords, SVN build 1413 contains all the fixes needed to have Xvid/AVI work.

This means you have to compile it yourself; but for linux this is easy.
Maybe, the HandBrake team should just release this build as their final work of Xvid/AVI.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //trac.handbrake.fr/changeset/1413 [ handbrake.fr ] In between v0.9.3 and v0.9.4 ; HandBrake was patched to make Xvid/AVI work properly with DVDs that contained VBR audio .
In otherwords , SVN build 1413 contains all the fixes needed to have Xvid/AVI work .
This means you have to compile it yourself ; but for linux this is easy .
Maybe , the HandBrake team should just release this build as their final work of Xvid/AVI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://trac.handbrake.fr/changeset/1413 [handbrake.fr]

In between v0.9.3 and v0.9.4; HandBrake was patched to make Xvid/AVI work properly with DVDs that contained VBR audio.
In otherwords, SVN build 1413 contains all the fixes needed to have Xvid/AVI work.
This means you have to compile it yourself; but for linux this is easy.
Maybe, the HandBrake team should just release this build as their final work of Xvid/AVI.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804872</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>DigitAl56K</author>
	<datestamp>1263753240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Protip: DivX Plus is H.264/AAC/MKV, and DivX desktop software has been playing and creating it for the past year. DivX Plus Web Player lets you embed it in your web pages and serve it from any HTTP server, and the first DivX Plus certified devices were announced at CES. You can even find DivX Plus presets for Handbrake <a href="http://labs.divx.com/node/15257" title="divx.com">here</a> [divx.com]!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Protip : DivX Plus is H.264/AAC/MKV , and DivX desktop software has been playing and creating it for the past year .
DivX Plus Web Player lets you embed it in your web pages and serve it from any HTTP server , and the first DivX Plus certified devices were announced at CES .
You can even find DivX Plus presets for Handbrake here [ divx.com ] !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Protip: DivX Plus is H.264/AAC/MKV, and DivX desktop software has been playing and creating it for the past year.
DivX Plus Web Player lets you embed it in your web pages and serve it from any HTTP server, and the first DivX Plus certified devices were announced at CES.
You can even find DivX Plus presets for Handbrake here [divx.com]!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807096</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263824640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.</p></div><p>What's a TV?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>h.264 might be incredible , but I have no way of playing it on my TV.What 's a TV ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.What's a TV?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30816322</id>
	<title>Re:HandBrake?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263839400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shoots itself in the foot? x.264 is the only codec I use. Good riddance to those old formats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shoots itself in the foot ?
x.264 is the only codec I use .
Good riddance to those old formats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shoots itself in the foot?
x.264 is the only codec I use.
Good riddance to those old formats.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810800</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263844080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I also think that there isn&rsquo;t a player out there that doesn&rsquo;t have these functions. Players where I know it&rsquo;s build in:<br>- mplayer<br>- vlc<br>- media player classic<br>- bsplayer<br>- my xine frontend</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I also think that there isn    t a player out there that doesn    t have these functions .
Players where I know it    s build in : - mplayer- vlc- media player classic- bsplayer- my xine frontend</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also think that there isn’t a player out there that doesn’t have these functions.
Players where I know it’s build in:- mplayer- vlc- media player classic- bsplayer- my xine frontend</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804144</id>
	<title>I haven't used DIVX in years</title>
	<author>GilliamOS</author>
	<datestamp>1263746280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I stopped downloading it on the torrent sites because I never found a quality encode job that was worth the bandwidth.

Meh, formats come and go in favor of better more modern solutions. I think the bigger note here is that HandBrake now supports 64-bit processor encoding.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I stopped downloading it on the torrent sites because I never found a quality encode job that was worth the bandwidth .
Meh , formats come and go in favor of better more modern solutions .
I think the bigger note here is that HandBrake now supports 64-bit processor encoding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I stopped downloading it on the torrent sites because I never found a quality encode job that was worth the bandwidth.
Meh, formats come and go in favor of better more modern solutions.
I think the bigger note here is that HandBrake now supports 64-bit processor encoding.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30811422</id>
	<title>Re:Sense Of Perspective</title>
	<author>jo\_ham</author>
	<datestamp>1263847140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Handbrake still outputs DivX - it just doesn;t support the AVI container anymore due to increasing complexities with the code trying to maintain support for it.</p><p>Handbrake has been going since the days of BeOS and has been doing just fine. There's no chance of it "dying". It didn't even have a windows version until recently. The DivX peope themselves have a preset for handbrake (current version), so as usual with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. summaries, the title is just erroneous. They claim AVI is obsolete because it is - not in terms of use, but in terms of the features it possesses, like support for chapters and other such things. It's the same as saying IE6 is obsolete, despite so many people still using it.</p><p>There are better container formats out there (even for DivX!) and the decision to drop AVI here is purely a code one. If you want to write your own transcoder, feel free to do so, or contribute to the ones already out there. That's the beauty of OSS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Handbrake still outputs DivX - it just doesn ; t support the AVI container anymore due to increasing complexities with the code trying to maintain support for it.Handbrake has been going since the days of BeOS and has been doing just fine .
There 's no chance of it " dying " .
It did n't even have a windows version until recently .
The DivX peope themselves have a preset for handbrake ( current version ) , so as usual with / .
summaries , the title is just erroneous .
They claim AVI is obsolete because it is - not in terms of use , but in terms of the features it possesses , like support for chapters and other such things .
It 's the same as saying IE6 is obsolete , despite so many people still using it.There are better container formats out there ( even for DivX !
) and the decision to drop AVI here is purely a code one .
If you want to write your own transcoder , feel free to do so , or contribute to the ones already out there .
That 's the beauty of OSS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Handbrake still outputs DivX - it just doesn;t support the AVI container anymore due to increasing complexities with the code trying to maintain support for it.Handbrake has been going since the days of BeOS and has been doing just fine.
There's no chance of it "dying".
It didn't even have a windows version until recently.
The DivX peope themselves have a preset for handbrake (current version), so as usual with /.
summaries, the title is just erroneous.
They claim AVI is obsolete because it is - not in terms of use, but in terms of the features it possesses, like support for chapters and other such things.
It's the same as saying IE6 is obsolete, despite so many people still using it.There are better container formats out there (even for DivX!
) and the decision to drop AVI here is purely a code one.
If you want to write your own transcoder, feel free to do so, or contribute to the ones already out there.
That's the beauty of OSS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30827004</id>
	<title>Re:Sense Of Perspective</title>
	<author>Taibhsear</author>
	<datestamp>1263908940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just a quick look through the latest 100 movie file on TPB show 1 MKV, 1 MP4, 98 AVI.</p></div><p>That has nothing to do with handbrake, and everything to do with filesize (ie. bandwidth issues).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a quick look through the latest 100 movie file on TPB show 1 MKV , 1 MP4 , 98 AVI.That has nothing to do with handbrake , and everything to do with filesize ( ie .
bandwidth issues ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a quick look through the latest 100 movie file on TPB show 1 MKV, 1 MP4, 98 AVI.That has nothing to do with handbrake, and everything to do with filesize (ie.
bandwidth issues).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804476</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263749100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>H.264 and MPEG are patent minefields.  Seems there's always another cheapjack patent outfit that comes out of the woodwork and starts suing every known tech company for $500 million apiece, as though they just discovered the violation last week.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>H.264 and MPEG are patent minefields .
Seems there 's always another cheapjack patent outfit that comes out of the woodwork and starts suing every known tech company for $ 500 million apiece , as though they just discovered the violation last week .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>H.264 and MPEG are patent minefields.
Seems there's always another cheapjack patent outfit that comes out of the woodwork and starts suing every known tech company for $500 million apiece, as though they just discovered the violation last week.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805106</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1263756180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We have availability of fast and reliable open source x264 H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC encoder and the wide spread usage of Matroska (MKV) container files and MPEG 4 (MP4) container files. Even some set-top boxes support playback of video and audio from both containers now and more are announced for this year.</p></div><p>All of which are priced so insanely high as to make the prospect of buying a PS3 just to watch movies a reasonable proposition. Whereas my DivX-compatible DVD player cost me what? $60? and that was about 4 years ago, I'm guessing they're even cheaper now.</p><p>Until you fix *THAT* little problem and lower prices to a reasonable level, no, it won't be time to move anywhere else yet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We have availability of fast and reliable open source x264 H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC encoder and the wide spread usage of Matroska ( MKV ) container files and MPEG 4 ( MP4 ) container files .
Even some set-top boxes support playback of video and audio from both containers now and more are announced for this year.All of which are priced so insanely high as to make the prospect of buying a PS3 just to watch movies a reasonable proposition .
Whereas my DivX-compatible DVD player cost me what ?
$ 60 ? and that was about 4 years ago , I 'm guessing they 're even cheaper now.Until you fix * THAT * little problem and lower prices to a reasonable level , no , it wo n't be time to move anywhere else yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have availability of fast and reliable open source x264 H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC encoder and the wide spread usage of Matroska (MKV) container files and MPEG 4 (MP4) container files.
Even some set-top boxes support playback of video and audio from both containers now and more are announced for this year.All of which are priced so insanely high as to make the prospect of buying a PS3 just to watch movies a reasonable proposition.
Whereas my DivX-compatible DVD player cost me what?
$60? and that was about 4 years ago, I'm guessing they're even cheaper now.Until you fix *THAT* little problem and lower prices to a reasonable level, no, it won't be time to move anywhere else yet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804900</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263753540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; h264 is so incredible you don't need divx anyway.</p><p>As good as it is, staying away from Apple's codecs can only be a good thing.</p><p>Why not ogg theora as default? With handbrake's support a free and open video codec could finally come to the fore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; h264 is so incredible you do n't need divx anyway.As good as it is , staying away from Apple 's codecs can only be a good thing.Why not ogg theora as default ?
With handbrake 's support a free and open video codec could finally come to the fore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; h264 is so incredible you don't need divx anyway.As good as it is, staying away from Apple's codecs can only be a good thing.Why not ogg theora as default?
With handbrake's support a free and open video codec could finally come to the fore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804418</id>
	<title>Re:Talking about apples and oranges.</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1263748560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I own a Magnavox DVD player with a DivX logo. The criteria for this logo include not only the MPEG-4 Part 2 codec but also the AVI container.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I own a Magnavox DVD player with a DivX logo .
The criteria for this logo include not only the MPEG-4 Part 2 codec but also the AVI container .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I own a Magnavox DVD player with a DivX logo.
The criteria for this logo include not only the MPEG-4 Part 2 codec but also the AVI container.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810122</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263840780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get a better TV.  The LG lh50 series plays almost anything I throw at it over the network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get a better TV .
The LG lh50 series plays almost anything I throw at it over the network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get a better TV.
The LG lh50 series plays almost anything I throw at it over the network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804848</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>CronoCloud</author>
	<datestamp>1263752940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A PS3 is what you need, and H.264 isn't new.  I've had an H.264 playing device since 2005! (PSP).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A PS3 is what you need , and H.264 is n't new .
I 've had an H.264 playing device since 2005 !
( PSP ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A PS3 is what you need, and H.264 isn't new.
I've had an H.264 playing device since 2005!
(PSP).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806230</id>
	<title>Lots of DVD players play DivX not h262</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263815700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lots of DVD players play DivX not h262. This would be one major reason to keep it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lots of DVD players play DivX not h262 .
This would be one major reason to keep it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lots of DVD players play DivX not h262.
This would be one major reason to keep it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807202</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, really a lot of anger</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1263825600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; I mean, I know it really pisses me off when people develop something free and open<br>&gt; source and then make a decision to remove something outdated and replaced by newer<br>&gt; functionality that I happen to disagree with.</p><p>Yes. They make something. They get people used to using it. Then they BREAK IT on purpose.</p><p>Of course users are going to get pissed. If you intentionally break something that's already<br>functional and working then you are bound to annoy someone. This is what happens when you<br>let other people use your tools. This is the real world and real users and not some ivory tower<br>nonsense completely detached from reality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I mean , I know it really pisses me off when people develop something free and open &gt; source and then make a decision to remove something outdated and replaced by newer &gt; functionality that I happen to disagree with.Yes .
They make something .
They get people used to using it .
Then they BREAK IT on purpose.Of course users are going to get pissed .
If you intentionally break something that 's alreadyfunctional and working then you are bound to annoy someone .
This is what happens when youlet other people use your tools .
This is the real world and real users and not some ivory towernonsense completely detached from reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I mean, I know it really pisses me off when people develop something free and open&gt; source and then make a decision to remove something outdated and replaced by newer&gt; functionality that I happen to disagree with.Yes.
They make something.
They get people used to using it.
Then they BREAK IT on purpose.Of course users are going to get pissed.
If you intentionally break something that's alreadyfunctional and working then you are bound to annoy someone.
This is what happens when youlet other people use your tools.
This is the real world and real users and not some ivory towernonsense completely detached from reality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804176</id>
	<title>Talking about apples and oranges.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263746640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DivX is a CODEC, AVI is a CONTAINER. Just because you don't support AVI doesn't mean you don't support DivX.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DivX is a CODEC , AVI is a CONTAINER .
Just because you do n't support AVI does n't mean you do n't support DivX .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DivX is a CODEC, AVI is a CONTAINER.
Just because you don't support AVI doesn't mean you don't support DivX.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804574</id>
	<title>Well HandBrake is rubbish anyway</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263750180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Big bloated, bad interface. I'm sure we'll do without it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Big bloated , bad interface .
I 'm sure we 'll do without it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Big bloated, bad interface.
I'm sure we'll do without it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30816126</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263836160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And if you want you can customize the keyboard shortcuts to be the same as WMP</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if you want you can customize the keyboard shortcuts to be the same as WMP</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if you want you can customize the keyboard shortcuts to be the same as WMP</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806780</id>
	<title>moving the ball forward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263822300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>h264 is so incredible you don't need divx anyway.</p></div><p>My Pioneer DVD player doesn't play h.264. Neither does any other DVD player, except perhaps those that cost four figures (I haven't looked into that).</p><p>h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.</p></div><p>Neither was DivX when it first started. Perhaps with this action (and others) people will push manufacturers to add support for H.264. After all, it's not like H.264 is some obscure tech geek's format (like the Ogg stuff generally is). H.264 is a major standard with lots and lots of decoder chips out there that support it.</p><p>If OS X supports it, and newer versions of Windows support it (as well as a lot of handheld devices), it is "The Future"(tm) and so it'd be nice if we can have one file that plays on all your various digital devices.</p><p>At least until H.265 comes around.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>h264 is so incredible you do n't need divx anyway.My Pioneer DVD player does n't play h.264 .
Neither does any other DVD player , except perhaps those that cost four figures ( I have n't looked into that ) .h.264 might be incredible , but I have no way of playing it on my TV.Neither was DivX when it first started .
Perhaps with this action ( and others ) people will push manufacturers to add support for H.264 .
After all , it 's not like H.264 is some obscure tech geek 's format ( like the Ogg stuff generally is ) .
H.264 is a major standard with lots and lots of decoder chips out there that support it.If OS X supports it , and newer versions of Windows support it ( as well as a lot of handheld devices ) , it is " The Future " ( tm ) and so it 'd be nice if we can have one file that plays on all your various digital devices.At least until H.265 comes around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>h264 is so incredible you don't need divx anyway.My Pioneer DVD player doesn't play h.264.
Neither does any other DVD player, except perhaps those that cost four figures (I haven't looked into that).h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.Neither was DivX when it first started.
Perhaps with this action (and others) people will push manufacturers to add support for H.264.
After all, it's not like H.264 is some obscure tech geek's format (like the Ogg stuff generally is).
H.264 is a major standard with lots and lots of decoder chips out there that support it.If OS X supports it, and newer versions of Windows support it (as well as a lot of handheld devices), it is "The Future"(tm) and so it'd be nice if we can have one file that plays on all your various digital devices.At least until H.265 comes around.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804126</id>
	<title>This happened 2 months ago</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263746100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With the last release. Kind of old news. I agree with the decision. h.264 is clearly the way of the (immediate) future</p><p>Propz to GNAA</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With the last release .
Kind of old news .
I agree with the decision .
h.264 is clearly the way of the ( immediate ) futurePropz to GNAA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the last release.
Kind of old news.
I agree with the decision.
h.264 is clearly the way of the (immediate) futurePropz to GNAA</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804342</id>
	<title>Ummm, what?</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1263747900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Eventually even Sony, the king of proprietary formats, caved into pressure and added DivX support to its DVD players and the PlayStation 3.</p></div><p>DivX <strong>is</strong> a proprietary format. The summary seems to be implying that somehow it is not. Sony licensed DivX from the company that created it, it didn't use some "open" implementation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Eventually even Sony , the king of proprietary formats , caved into pressure and added DivX support to its DVD players and the PlayStation 3.DivX is a proprietary format .
The summary seems to be implying that somehow it is not .
Sony licensed DivX from the company that created it , it did n't use some " open " implementation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Eventually even Sony, the king of proprietary formats, caved into pressure and added DivX support to its DVD players and the PlayStation 3.DivX is a proprietary format.
The summary seems to be implying that somehow it is not.
Sony licensed DivX from the company that created it, it didn't use some "open" implementation.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804274</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263747360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>How experienced do you need to be to use handbrake?  For crying out loud, if you can't tie your shoes you don' t need to try and convert video files.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How experienced do you need to be to use handbrake ?
For crying out loud , if you ca n't tie your shoes you don ' t need to try and convert video files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How experienced do you need to be to use handbrake?
For crying out loud, if you can't tie your shoes you don' t need to try and convert video files.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804490</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263749220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Be careful with the word "mature". I know some industries where that is a synonym for obsolete, with "mature" technologies no longer being supported in the latest software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Be careful with the word " mature " .
I know some industries where that is a synonym for obsolete , with " mature " technologies no longer being supported in the latest software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be careful with the word "mature".
I know some industries where that is a synonym for obsolete, with "mature" technologies no longer being supported in the latest software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806580</id>
	<title>Apple Fanbots invaded it.</title>
	<author>Zoidbot</author>
	<datestamp>1263820200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Handbrake project got invaded by Apple fanboys, They also removed all the profiles except the Apple ones, go figure.   The tool is now about as useful as a chocolate fireguard, and most people have either moved to other tools, or using old versions..</p><p>Shame it used to be a good app..  What idiot would lock an app down to apple-only profiles, when they have such a small marketshare?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Handbrake project got invaded by Apple fanboys , They also removed all the profiles except the Apple ones , go figure .
The tool is now about as useful as a chocolate fireguard , and most people have either moved to other tools , or using old versions..Shame it used to be a good app.. What idiot would lock an app down to apple-only profiles , when they have such a small marketshare ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Handbrake project got invaded by Apple fanboys, They also removed all the profiles except the Apple ones, go figure.
The tool is now about as useful as a chocolate fireguard, and most people have either moved to other tools, or using old versions..Shame it used to be a good app..  What idiot would lock an app down to apple-only profiles, when they have such a small marketshare?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804180</id>
	<title>Yeah, last November...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263746700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And they were right to do so. It's one of the big reasons why OGG/OGM was such a hard sell for HTML5.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And they were right to do so .
It 's one of the big reasons why OGG/OGM was such a hard sell for HTML5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And they were right to do so.
It's one of the big reasons why OGG/OGM was such a hard sell for HTML5.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806918</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>jack2000</author>
	<datestamp>1263823200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So can VLC, infact it's kinda the same: ctrl, shift and alt + the arrows do the same
You can even set up how far it seeks with those keys from the preferences...</htmltext>
<tokenext>So can VLC , infact it 's kinda the same : ctrl , shift and alt + the arrows do the same You can even set up how far it seeks with those keys from the preferences.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So can VLC, infact it's kinda the same: ctrl, shift and alt + the arrows do the same
You can even set up how far it seeks with those keys from the preferences...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804366</id>
	<title>DIVX AVI MKV MP4 eh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263748080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MKV and AVI are containers. DIVX/XVID and H.264 are codecs. It is common practice to put H.264 in a MKV container cause avi containers don't handle it. But you can put Divx in MKV as well. So I just question this articles tech savvy-ness in describing what is happening. It seems like a exaggerated bla bla...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MKV and AVI are containers .
DIVX/XVID and H.264 are codecs .
It is common practice to put H.264 in a MKV container cause avi containers do n't handle it .
But you can put Divx in MKV as well .
So I just question this articles tech savvy-ness in describing what is happening .
It seems like a exaggerated bla bla.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MKV and AVI are containers.
DIVX/XVID and H.264 are codecs.
It is common practice to put H.264 in a MKV container cause avi containers don't handle it.
But you can put Divx in MKV as well.
So I just question this articles tech savvy-ness in describing what is happening.
It seems like a exaggerated bla bla...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30814456</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>caitsith01</author>
	<datestamp>1263819480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You're out of date. Win7 supports DivX, XviD, h264, AAC, and a number of other formats right out of the box. I've used WMP (on a clean install) to play<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mov files that were recorded by a digital camera and encoded as "QuickTime movies" in some MPEG 4 variant.</p><p>Perhaps the Handbrake folks just decided that the time to drop support for a format is when Microsoft includes support for it out of the box?</p></div><p>Great, good for them.  Meanwhile just thinking through my various devices at home I have... 4 that will play DivX/XviD but will not play h264.</p><p>I wonder how many other people who aren't iDrones have devices that don't support it?  E.g. DVD players, media streaming devices, non-Apple PMPs, mobile phones...</p><p>Seems like a pretty silly way to go.  Kill off support for the majority of people who choose not to use Apple products.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're out of date .
Win7 supports DivX , XviD , h264 , AAC , and a number of other formats right out of the box .
I 've used WMP ( on a clean install ) to play .mov files that were recorded by a digital camera and encoded as " QuickTime movies " in some MPEG 4 variant.Perhaps the Handbrake folks just decided that the time to drop support for a format is when Microsoft includes support for it out of the box ? Great , good for them .
Meanwhile just thinking through my various devices at home I have... 4 that will play DivX/XviD but will not play h264.I wonder how many other people who are n't iDrones have devices that do n't support it ?
E.g. DVD players , media streaming devices , non-Apple PMPs , mobile phones...Seems like a pretty silly way to go .
Kill off support for the majority of people who choose not to use Apple products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're out of date.
Win7 supports DivX, XviD, h264, AAC, and a number of other formats right out of the box.
I've used WMP (on a clean install) to play .mov files that were recorded by a digital camera and encoded as "QuickTime movies" in some MPEG 4 variant.Perhaps the Handbrake folks just decided that the time to drop support for a format is when Microsoft includes support for it out of the box?Great, good for them.
Meanwhile just thinking through my various devices at home I have... 4 that will play DivX/XviD but will not play h264.I wonder how many other people who aren't iDrones have devices that don't support it?
E.g. DVD players, media streaming devices, non-Apple PMPs, mobile phones...Seems like a pretty silly way to go.
Kill off support for the majority of people who choose not to use Apple products.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806626</id>
	<title>Re:They don't like supporting it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263820620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are also plenty of not DivX Plus certified devices that can play H.264/AAC/MKV perfectly. The <a href="http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=735" title="wdc.com" rel="nofollow">WD TV</a> [wdc.com] and other cheap media players like Popcornhour and Xstreamer support it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are also plenty of not DivX Plus certified devices that can play H.264/AAC/MKV perfectly .
The WD TV [ wdc.com ] and other cheap media players like Popcornhour and Xstreamer support it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are also plenty of not DivX Plus certified devices that can play H.264/AAC/MKV perfectly.
The WD TV [wdc.com] and other cheap media players like Popcornhour and Xstreamer support it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30822822</id>
	<title>Re:Because H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC is Mature!</title>
	<author>skeeto</author>
	<datestamp>1263931320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right on! When I saw the headline about dropping XviD, I thought, "Good riddance!" I'm so tired of coming across new rips in XviD + AVI. I use H.264 and MKV for all of mine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right on !
When I saw the headline about dropping XviD , I thought , " Good riddance !
" I 'm so tired of coming across new rips in XviD + AVI .
I use H.264 and MKV for all of mine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right on!
When I saw the headline about dropping XviD, I thought, "Good riddance!
" I'm so tired of coming across new rips in XviD + AVI.
I use H.264 and MKV for all of mine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>A Friendly Troll</author>
	<datestamp>1263847260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>h264 is so incredible you don't need divx anyway.</p></div><p>My Pioneer DVD player doesn't play h.264. Neither does any other DVD player, except perhaps those that cost four figures (I haven't looked into that).</p><p>h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>h264 is so incredible you do n't need divx anyway.My Pioneer DVD player does n't play h.264 .
Neither does any other DVD player , except perhaps those that cost four figures ( I have n't looked into that ) .h.264 might be incredible , but I have no way of playing it on my TV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>h264 is so incredible you don't need divx anyway.My Pioneer DVD player doesn't play h.264.
Neither does any other DVD player, except perhaps those that cost four figures (I haven't looked into that).h.264 might be incredible, but I have no way of playing it on my TV.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805920</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>bheer</author>
	<datestamp>1263812040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I could be wrong, but afaik <a href="http://apcmag.com/windows\_7\_surprise\_divx\_built\_in.htm" title="apcmag.com">Windows 7 has DivX built-in</a> [apcmag.com]. It also plays most Quicktime<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.MOV files out of the box.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I could be wrong , but afaik Windows 7 has DivX built-in [ apcmag.com ] .
It also plays most Quicktime .MOV files out of the box .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I could be wrong, but afaik Windows 7 has DivX built-in [apcmag.com].
It also plays most Quicktime .MOV files out of the box.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805168</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263756900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Divx/Xvid decoding is available out of the box on Windows 7<br>http://apcmag.com/windows\_7\_surprise\_divx\_built\_in.htm</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Divx/Xvid decoding is available out of the box on Windows 7http : //apcmag.com/windows \ _7 \ _surprise \ _divx \ _built \ _in.htm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Divx/Xvid decoding is available out of the box on Windows 7http://apcmag.com/windows\_7\_surprise\_divx\_built\_in.htm</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30816412</id>
	<title>Wow, just like Microsoft was saying years ago...</title>
	<author>TheNetAvenger</author>
	<datestamp>1263840960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"AVI is a rough beast. It is obsolete"</p><p>Yep...</p><p>Microsoft has been trying to kill AVI for years because of the lack of features compared to more robust options.</p><p>I like the MK4 move, but truly don't get the move to Apple's MP4 format, which is just as obsolete in terms of features as AVI, let alone Apple's control/influence of the format.</p><p>Unlike 5 years ago, Microsoft is now a strong advocate on codec neutrality, even though they are the original designer of VC1/WMV. Look at Microsoft's support of HTML5 and even Silverlight as an example as the latest versions handle any codec and is also being used server side to provide Flash video content to the iPhone. (Something Microsoft hasn't even given their own products like the ZuneHD yet.)</p><p>I have never been a big fan of the whole DivX and even XVid movement because of the quality and bandaid additions to the format over the years. However in torrent world, it is still king, sadly. The code for DivX XVid (MPEG4 P2) are taken from Microsoft's early MPEG4 reference implementation from around 1998, and the quality hasn't improved much since then, while Microsoft's WMV/VC1 and the final MPEG4 (P4) formats progressed almost a whole generation.</p><p>I personally think that since Microsoft gave over VC1 tot he VC1 standards group (like 20 companies) it again needs to be considered by the OSS world as a strong format, as it doesn't have the licensing restrictions of MPEG4p4, and there are many OSS codec tools and encoders and players now available, and it gives you variable bitrate packaging with native BluRay HD from most studios.</p><p>There are some other good OSS codecs and packages out there, but it is probably time to give VC1 a chance even if Microsoft invented it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" AVI is a rough beast .
It is obsolete " Yep...Microsoft has been trying to kill AVI for years because of the lack of features compared to more robust options.I like the MK4 move , but truly do n't get the move to Apple 's MP4 format , which is just as obsolete in terms of features as AVI , let alone Apple 's control/influence of the format.Unlike 5 years ago , Microsoft is now a strong advocate on codec neutrality , even though they are the original designer of VC1/WMV .
Look at Microsoft 's support of HTML5 and even Silverlight as an example as the latest versions handle any codec and is also being used server side to provide Flash video content to the iPhone .
( Something Microsoft has n't even given their own products like the ZuneHD yet .
) I have never been a big fan of the whole DivX and even XVid movement because of the quality and bandaid additions to the format over the years .
However in torrent world , it is still king , sadly .
The code for DivX XVid ( MPEG4 P2 ) are taken from Microsoft 's early MPEG4 reference implementation from around 1998 , and the quality has n't improved much since then , while Microsoft 's WMV/VC1 and the final MPEG4 ( P4 ) formats progressed almost a whole generation.I personally think that since Microsoft gave over VC1 tot he VC1 standards group ( like 20 companies ) it again needs to be considered by the OSS world as a strong format , as it does n't have the licensing restrictions of MPEG4p4 , and there are many OSS codec tools and encoders and players now available , and it gives you variable bitrate packaging with native BluRay HD from most studios.There are some other good OSS codecs and packages out there , but it is probably time to give VC1 a chance even if Microsoft invented it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"AVI is a rough beast.
It is obsolete"Yep...Microsoft has been trying to kill AVI for years because of the lack of features compared to more robust options.I like the MK4 move, but truly don't get the move to Apple's MP4 format, which is just as obsolete in terms of features as AVI, let alone Apple's control/influence of the format.Unlike 5 years ago, Microsoft is now a strong advocate on codec neutrality, even though they are the original designer of VC1/WMV.
Look at Microsoft's support of HTML5 and even Silverlight as an example as the latest versions handle any codec and is also being used server side to provide Flash video content to the iPhone.
(Something Microsoft hasn't even given their own products like the ZuneHD yet.
)I have never been a big fan of the whole DivX and even XVid movement because of the quality and bandaid additions to the format over the years.
However in torrent world, it is still king, sadly.
The code for DivX XVid (MPEG4 P2) are taken from Microsoft's early MPEG4 reference implementation from around 1998, and the quality hasn't improved much since then, while Microsoft's WMV/VC1 and the final MPEG4 (P4) formats progressed almost a whole generation.I personally think that since Microsoft gave over VC1 tot he VC1 standards group (like 20 companies) it again needs to be considered by the OSS world as a strong format, as it doesn't have the licensing restrictions of MPEG4p4, and there are many OSS codec tools and encoders and players now available, and it gives you variable bitrate packaging with native BluRay HD from most studios.There are some other good OSS codecs and packages out there, but it is probably time to give VC1 a chance even if Microsoft invented it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804556</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Mad Merlin</author>
	<datestamp>1263750000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows doesn't play anything by default. Who cares?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows does n't play anything by default .
Who cares ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows doesn't play anything by default.
Who cares?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806236</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1263815760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're out of date. Win7 supports DivX, XviD, h264, AAC, and a number of other formats right out of the box. I've used WMP (on a clean install) to play<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mov files that were recorded by a digital camera and encoded as "QuickTime movies" in some MPEG 4 variant.</p><p>Perhaps the Handbrake folks just decided that the time to drop support for a format is when Microsoft includes support for it out of the box?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're out of date .
Win7 supports DivX , XviD , h264 , AAC , and a number of other formats right out of the box .
I 've used WMP ( on a clean install ) to play .mov files that were recorded by a digital camera and encoded as " QuickTime movies " in some MPEG 4 variant.Perhaps the Handbrake folks just decided that the time to drop support for a format is when Microsoft includes support for it out of the box ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're out of date.
Win7 supports DivX, XviD, h264, AAC, and a number of other formats right out of the box.
I've used WMP (on a clean install) to play .mov files that were recorded by a digital camera and encoded as "QuickTime movies" in some MPEG 4 variant.Perhaps the Handbrake folks just decided that the time to drop support for a format is when Microsoft includes support for it out of the box?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804168</id>
	<title>They don't like supporting it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263746520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Basically, from the article:<p><div class="quote"><p> The [Handbrake DivX] code has not been actively maintained since 2005. Keeping it in the library while implementing new features means a very convoluted data pipeline, full of conditionals that make the code more difficult to read and maintain, and make output harder to predict. As such, it is now gone. It is not coming back, and good riddance."</p></div><p>They go on to explain that DivX quality isn't as good either.  I am not sure if that is true or not, but I think the major reason they are dropping it is because they didn't want to be bothered.  Which is as valid a reason as any, I suppose.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Basically , from the article : The [ Handbrake DivX ] code has not been actively maintained since 2005 .
Keeping it in the library while implementing new features means a very convoluted data pipeline , full of conditionals that make the code more difficult to read and maintain , and make output harder to predict .
As such , it is now gone .
It is not coming back , and good riddance .
" They go on to explain that DivX quality is n't as good either .
I am not sure if that is true or not , but I think the major reason they are dropping it is because they did n't want to be bothered .
Which is as valid a reason as any , I suppose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Basically, from the article: The [Handbrake DivX] code has not been actively maintained since 2005.
Keeping it in the library while implementing new features means a very convoluted data pipeline, full of conditionals that make the code more difficult to read and maintain, and make output harder to predict.
As such, it is now gone.
It is not coming back, and good riddance.
"They go on to explain that DivX quality isn't as good either.
I am not sure if that is true or not, but I think the major reason they are dropping it is because they didn't want to be bothered.
Which is as valid a reason as any, I suppose.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30815702</id>
	<title>you've heard of Handbrake...</title>
	<author>vaporland</author>
	<datestamp>1263831300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...if you regularly rip different video formats to AVI. My Philips DVD player plays AVIs from data discs. I could network a video server, wire up a bunch of crap to my TV and stream video, Or I can just convert multiple FLVs to AVIs in Handbrake all at once, then burn the AVIs onto a DVD data disc, and watch that on my Philips DVD player and Sony TV with little loss of quality.<br> <br>Apple Safari will let you see all of the files on a webpage (WINDOW -&gt; ACTIVITY); you can click and COPY the name of the FLV you want, then PASTE into the DOWNLOADS window - free FLV downloads. This way, I can download FLV files from Flash "player only" websites and run them through Handbrake: presto, web video on your TV, without the web connection...</htmltext>
<tokenext>...if you regularly rip different video formats to AVI .
My Philips DVD player plays AVIs from data discs .
I could network a video server , wire up a bunch of crap to my TV and stream video , Or I can just convert multiple FLVs to AVIs in Handbrake all at once , then burn the AVIs onto a DVD data disc , and watch that on my Philips DVD player and Sony TV with little loss of quality .
Apple Safari will let you see all of the files on a webpage ( WINDOW - &gt; ACTIVITY ) ; you can click and COPY the name of the FLV you want , then PASTE into the DOWNLOADS window - free FLV downloads .
This way , I can download FLV files from Flash " player only " websites and run them through Handbrake : presto , web video on your TV , without the web connection.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...if you regularly rip different video formats to AVI.
My Philips DVD player plays AVIs from data discs.
I could network a video server, wire up a bunch of crap to my TV and stream video, Or I can just convert multiple FLVs to AVIs in Handbrake all at once, then burn the AVIs onto a DVD data disc, and watch that on my Philips DVD player and Sony TV with little loss of quality.
Apple Safari will let you see all of the files on a webpage (WINDOW -&gt; ACTIVITY); you can click and COPY the name of the FLV you want, then PASTE into the DOWNLOADS window - free FLV downloads.
This way, I can download FLV files from Flash "player only" websites and run them through Handbrake: presto, web video on your TV, without the web connection...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804246</id>
	<title>Re:Talking about apples and oranges.</title>
	<author>RyuuzakiTetsuya</author>
	<datestamp>1263747120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had this same thought but I think the overall point was that the DivX codec in the AVI container is a piece of shit.  MKV and MP4 are the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had this same thought but I think the overall point was that the DivX codec in the AVI container is a piece of shit .
MKV and MP4 are the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had this same thought but I think the overall point was that the DivX codec in the AVI container is a piece of shit.
MKV and MP4 are the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810622</id>
	<title>Re:foot.shoot();</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263843180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Neither does any other DVD player, except perhaps those that cost four figures (I haven't looked into that).</p></div></blockquote><p>Geez, if that's the problem, I can build you a DVD player that costs less than that.  Just get an ION mobo and use the VDPAU drivers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Neither does any other DVD player , except perhaps those that cost four figures ( I have n't looked into that ) .Geez , if that 's the problem , I can build you a DVD player that costs less than that .
Just get an ION mobo and use the VDPAU drivers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Neither does any other DVD player, except perhaps those that cost four figures (I haven't looked into that).Geez, if that's the problem, I can build you a DVD player that costs less than that.
Just get an ION mobo and use the VDPAU drivers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30815576</id>
	<title>mkv fucking sucks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263829860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>mkv is for filthy kikes</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>mkv is for filthy kikes</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mkv is for filthy kikes</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30811376</id>
	<title>Sounds to me...</title>
	<author>slantyyz</author>
	<datestamp>1263846900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like the devs are just saying "If you don't like it, then go fork yourself!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like the devs are just saying " If you do n't like it , then go fork yourself !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like the devs are just saying "If you don't like it, then go fork yourself!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30816322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30816126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30814456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30809990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30811042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30809712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30822822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30827004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30815702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30856328
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30809994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808464
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30814502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808520
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807096
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30811422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804590
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0254225_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30814502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30822822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804588
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808520
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804848
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805216
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804574
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805758
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804246
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807018
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805780
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807050
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810566
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804144
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807202
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804770
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806626
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808360
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804278
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805606
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805928
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30816126
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30809990
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810800
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806092
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806892
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806550
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806278
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807204
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30809712
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806918
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807722
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804274
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805028
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804340
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804590
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804504
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806230
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805644
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807834
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805446
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810126
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806836
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810122
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810894
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807996
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807096
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810570
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810288
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806780
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30856328
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808326
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810052
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30809994
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30810622
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804900
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805702
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805920
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30806236
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30814456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804556
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808758
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808116
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30807546
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805600
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805168
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804518
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30816322
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805692
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30811042
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804330
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30811422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30808464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30815702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30827004
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805902
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805126
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30804686
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0254225.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0254225.30805334
</commentlist>
</conversation>
